Read on Twitter
Josh Thomas, Diverse Casting, and finding a solution. A (VERY LONG) thread:
A 2016 video clip of Josh Thomas and an all-white panel from a writer's festival discussing the diverse casting resurfaced recently, and people got MAD. It was "inappropriate, offensive, racist, etc". We argued back and forth about WHY it was problematic...
People were angry with how Josh said it: "He was cocky, arrogant!" They were offended by the stereotypes: "Indians are more than just 7/11 workers!" They were furious with WHAT Josh said: "Finding an experienced actor that's not white is really hard..." (cont.)
BUT amidst the outrage, there appears to be very little discussion about why he said it: The thing is - Josh said what he said because he, and many others in the industry (including myself) believe it to be true. Statistically, the numbers actually back this up:
This is a report from Screen Australia about diversity: https://www.screenaustralia.gov.au/getmedia/157b05b4-255a-47b4-bd8b-9f715555fb44/tv-drama-diversity.pdf (page 28) One quote - "Several cultural groups (on Showcast) contain fewer than a dozen casting options in younger and older age groups." This is the number one problem addressed in the report (cont.)
So, seeking to cast the net wider using the EXPERIENCED talent that exists, often means crossing ethnic boundaries and offending BIPOC actors. I've personally been asked to audition as Ethiopian, middle-eastern, Indian, etc. Nobody wants that. Authenticity is key. (cont.)
Some took Josh's statememt as a suggestion that POC were not as talented as non-POC. But let's clarify: Talent is not EXPERIENCE. Experience harnesses talent. Historically, BIPOC have been denied equal experience to non-BIPOC actors. We are ALL still catching up...
The discussion then moved on to WHY it's important to give the inexperienced a chance. "Casting diverse shouldn't be considered risk-taking!", "How will you know if you don't give people a shot", etc. Which presents another problem:
Inexperience costs money. LOTS of money. The bigger the role, the more money it costs. Inexperienced actors require more attention. From directing, to lighting, etc. An inexperienced actor can turn a shoot day of 11mins screentime down to 9mins, no matter how talented they are...
So, where does the extra 2mins screentime come from? Overtime. An inexperienced actor can push a budget by tens of thousands of dollars across a production. When it's 30 seconds to wrap, and you NEED to nail the scene, experience proves its value ten-fold...
Now - that's not to say that investing in the inexperienced isn't worth it! It certainly is. But where does the return on investment come from? For gov't-funded networks like ABC/SBS, return on $ comes in the satisfaction that they're portraying a beautiful, diverse landscape...
But some commercial networks need a more immediate return on their investment; Many in these establishments actively DO care, but also require and hope that diverse casting will connect with members of a particular community and gain them views/subscriptions/clicks...
So what are the solutions? @Briggs suggested that people need to "do better". Which is true. Everyone from the top down needs to do better. So what does 'doing better' actually look like?
Casting takes time. Open casting takes even longer. A casting director will likely be spreading their attention between ur project, 2 other shows, 3 ads, etc. So hitting the streets, poring through amateur auditions, all of this takes time. And more importantly - it costs MONEY.
Someone suggested we reclaim our exported talent, but thats even MORE expensive. So 'doing better' may mean channeling more production budget into casting, which means taking it from another dept that is already working with bare min. This means more delays, less resources, etc.
The Screen Oz report also states that almost all acting agents acknowledge that the majority of the talent they represent are anglo/non-BIPOC. So the numbers are against us before the casting call even goes out. One person mentioned Mindy Kaling's open casting call for the lead..
...Indian actor in her new series. A worthy endeavour, but also one of the big benefits from an initiative like this would have been the ROI thru earned media received through news outlets that ran the story worldwide. It's great PR. It proves that they care. But, it's a one-off.
Some productions will think ahead, as @mrbenjaminlaw discussed, they knew they needed 8 asian core cast members, so they came prepared. Same with @RyanJGriffen's casting of Cleverman. However, it is my humble opinion (and I tread very carefully here) that...
...these castings are examples of targeted ethnic casting as opposed to 'diverse casting'. The roles were written with purpose for specific culture/race/backgrounds. And they are shows on supportive broadcasters, so a willingness to invest in talent was paramount from get-go.
Both @RyanJGriffen & @hunterpage made good points that where Aus lacks is the casting of BIPOC in roles that are of unspecified ethnicity. Where drama is not reliant on the character's ethnicity. Pitted against non-BIPOC, roles will often go to non-BIPOC due to unconscious bias.
So even without character descriptions, character names like Tim or Doug will often prompt bias from a reader. When they're shown audition tapes of BIPOC, a requirement to change their mind already exists, without even clicking play on the audition yet...
So - what is the solution? I don't know. In an idea world, the solution would be driven by a true DESIRE to be balanced. From the network, all the way down to the writer. Eradicate bias from society in general! In reality, though, I think the solution lies with money. Incentive..
Just one example of a helpful solution may come from a company like @ShowcastCasting, who could consider offering free/heavily-discounted listings to unrepresented BIPOC with a targeted push for talent outside the 19-40 age bracket. Help get people 'into the system'...
Another solution may be in the form of rebate from the government. A set of criteria similar to the Bechdel test be applied to any production, and shows are given 90% of their allocated budget, & the final 10% is delivered once its proven that the show has a truly diverse cast.
Or another solution is - as @ms_michellelaw suggested - we tear the system down. But more than anything - BIPOC need to support ALL the other BIPOC content that exists. Prove that there is value in diversity. Get ratings up! If u have any further suggestions, pls add them below!
And if you are non-BIPOC and you want to make a meaningful change in all this, SUPPORT all the great work made by BIPOC talent! Watch a show tonight. Right now. Follow the talent on instagram. Buy albums. Go and see BIPOC theatre. Share us on your socials. Spread the word. x
