UCLA Hollywood Diversity Report 2018 2-27-18

Acknowledgements
This report was authored by Dr. Darnell Hunt, Dr. Ana-Christina Ramón, Michael
Tran, Amberia Sargent, and Debanjan Roychoudhury. Michael Tran, Amberia
Sargent, Carmella Stoddard, and Debanjan Roychoudhury contributed to data
collection for analyses.
Financial support in 2017 was provided by the following: Ralph J. Bunche Center
for African American Studies at UCLA (The Hollywood Advancement Project),
BET Networks, El Rey Network, OWN, LLC, Sony Pictures Entertainment, Starz
Entertainment, The Will & Jada Smith Family Foundation, The Walt Disney Company,
and Time Warner Inc..
Photo Credits: Rawpixel/Thinkstock (p. 20); Alex LMX/Shutterstock (p. 28);

Shutterstock (p. 44); StacieStauffSmith Photos/Shutterstock (p. 52); fredmantel/
Thinkstock (p. 58); monkeybusinessimages/Thinkstock (p. 70); bannosuke/
Shutterstock (p. 75).
Table of Contents
Study Highlights.............................................................................................................2
Introduction....................................................................................................................6
Hollywood Diversity Report 2018....................................................................................6
The Data .........................................................................................................................7
Hollywood Landscape.....................................................................................................8
Genre.............................................................................................................................12
Leads............................................................................................................................. 14
Overall Cast Diversity....................................................................................................20
Directors....................................................................................................................... 28
TV Show Creators..........................................................................................................34
Writers.......................................................................................................................... 38
Gatekeepers................................................................................................................. 44
Accolades..................................................................................................................... 52
The Bottom Line............................................................................................................ 58
New Shows: 2017-18.......................................................................................................70
Conclusion.................................................................................................................... 74
Five Years of Progress?.................................................................................................. 74
Authors......................................................................................................................... 77
Appendix...................................................................................................................... 78
Endnotes....................................................................................................................... 79
S T U DY H I G H L I G H T S
This is the fifth in a series of annual reports to examine relationships between

diversity and the bottom line in the Hollywood entertainment industry. It considers
the top 200 theatrical film releases in 2016 and 1,251 broadcast, cable and digital
platform television shows from the 2015-16 season in order to document the degree
to which women and people of color are present in front of and behind the camera.
It discusses any patterns between these findings and box office receipts and
audience ratings.
U.S. Population Shares, White and Minority, 1960-2050

100%
85%
80% White
61.3% Minority
60% 53%
38.7%
40% 47%
20% 15%
0%
1960 2016 2050
Source: U.S. Census
The following highlights emerge from this year’s analysis:
1. Minorities. Constituting nearly 40 percent of the U. S. population in 2016,

minorities will become the majority within a few decades. Since the previous report,
people of color have posted gains relative to their White counterparts in eight of
the key industry employment arenas examined (i.e., film directors, film writers,
broadcast scripted leads, cable scripted leads, broadcast reality and other leads,
2
H O L LY W O O D D I V E R S I T Y R E P O R T 2 0 1 8
cable reality and other leads, digital scripted
leads, and digital scripted show creators).
Minorities lost ground in only one of the 11
“ Consistent with the findings
of earlier reports in this series,
arenas (i.e., broadcast scripted show creators) new evidence from 2015-
and merely held their ground in the other 16 suggests that America’s
two (i.e., film leads and cable scripted show
creators). Despite quite a bit of progress for the
increasingly diverse audiences
prefer diverse film and
”
group since the previous report, they remained
underrepresented on every front in 2015-16: television content.
• Nearly 3 to 1 among film leads (13.9 percent)
• 3 to 1 among film directors (12.6 percent)
They fell further behind in the former three
• Nearly 5 to 1 among film writers (8.1 percent)
arenas and merely held their ground in the latter.
• 2 to 1 among broadcast scripted leads (18.7 Slightly more than half of the population, women
percent) remained underrepresented on every front in
• Nearly 2 to 1 among cable scripted leads (20.2 2015-16:
percent) • Nearly 2 to 1 among film leads (31.2 percent)
• Nearly 2 to 1 among broadcast reality and • More than 7 to 1 among film directors (6.9
other leads (26.6 percent) percent)
• Nearly 2 to 1 among leads for cable reality and • Nearly 4 to 1 among film writers (13.8 percent)
other leads (20.9 percent)
• Less than proportionate representation
• 3 to 1 among digital scripted leads (12.9 among broadcast scripted leads (35.7 percent)
percent)
• Greater than 5 to 1 among the creators of among cable scripted leads (44.8 percent)
broadcast scripted shows (7.1 percent)
• Nearly 3 to 1 among broadcast reality and
• Greater than 5 to 1 among the creators of other leads (18.8 percent)
cable scripted shows (7.3 percent)
• Nearly 2 to 1 among cable reality and other
• Greater than 2 to 1 among the creators of leads (29.8 percent)
digital scripted shows (15.7 percent)
2. Women. Relative to their male counterparts, among digital scripted leads (43.1 percent)
women posted gains in all the key employment
• Greater than 2 to 1 among the creators of
arenas since the previous report, with the
broadcast scripted shows (22.1 percent)
exception of four —
film directors, broadcast
scripted show leads, cable scripted show • 3 to 1 among the creators of cable scripted
creators, and broadcast scripted show creators. shows (16.9 percent)
3
• Nearly 2 to 1 among the creators of digital large, cable shows created by women gained a
scripted shows (31.5 percent) little ground relative to those created by men.
4. Gatekeepers. Since the previous report, the

Overview: Degrees of Underrepresentation,
three dominant talent agencies have increased
Gains and Losses, 2015-16*
their combined shares of the film directors, film
Arena Minorities Women leads, film writers, cable scripted show creators,
and broadcast scripted leads credited for the
Film Leads < 3 to 1 < 2 to 1
theatrical films and television shows examined
Film Directors 3 to 1 > 7 to 1
in 2015-16. The remaining talent agencies
Film Writers < 5 to 1 < 4 to 1
Broadcast Scripted 2 to 1 < Proportionate
collectively posted significant gains among
Leads digital scripted leads and made smaller inroads
Cable Scripted Leads < 2 to 1 < Proportionate among broadcast scripted show creators. People
Broadcast Reality/ < 2 to 1 < 3 to 1 of color posted significant gains among the
Other Leads
broadcast scripted leads represented by both
Cable Reality/Other < 2 to 1 < 2 to 1
Leads the dominant and remaining agencies, and more
Digital Scripted Leads 3 to 1 < Proportionate modest gains among credited film directors and
Broadcast Scripted > 5 to 1 > 2 to 1 digital scripted show creators. Nonetheless,
Creators
minorities remained severely underrepresented
Cable Scripted > 5 to 1 3 to 1
Creators on the rosters of these powerful industry
Digital Scripted > 2 to 1 < 2 to 1 gatekeepers.
Creators
*Gains since the previous report highlighted in blue, 5. The Bottom Line. Consistent with the findings
losses in gold. of earlier reports in this series, new evidence
from 2015-16 suggests that America’s increasingly
3. Accolades. In 2016, minority-directed films
diverse audiences prefer diverse film and
and those with minority leads gained ground
television content.
at the Oscars relative to those led by White
directors or that featured White leads. By • Films with casts that were from 21 percent
contrast, films with women leads lost ground to 30 percent minority enjoyed the highest
at the Oscars in 2016, while those directed by median global box office receipts and the
women failed for a second year in a row to win a highest median return on investment, while
single Oscar. At the Emmys, broadcast scripted films with the most racially and ethnically
shows created by people of color gained no homogenous casts were the poorest
ground relative to those pitched by White performers
show creators, while shows created by women • Minorities accounted for the majority of ticket
succeeded in closing the huge gender gap a bit. sales for five of the top 10 films in 2016 (ranked
Meanwhile, not one of the cable scripted shows by global box office)
created by minorities won an Emmy for the
• Films with casts that were from 21 percent
2015-16 television season (matching the previous
to 30 percent minority were released, on
four seasons). Though the gender gap remained
4
average, in the most international markets in • The lion’s share of the top 10 cable scripted
2016 shows among Asian, Black, and Latino
households, as well as half of the top 10 shows
• Films with Black and Latino leads and majority-
among White households and viewers 18-49,
minority casts were released, on average, in
featured casts that were at least 21 percent
the fewest international markets in 2016
minority in 2015-16
• Median 18-49 viewer ratings (as well as median
household ratings among Blacks, Latinos, and 6. New Shows: 2017-18 Season. Looking ahead
Asian Americans) peaked during the 2015-16 to the 2017-18 television season, the prognosis is
season for broadcast scripted shows featuring mixed with respect to the prospects for further
casts that were greater than 20 percent advancement on the television diversity front.
minority Actors of color claimed 28 percent of the lead
roles for the new scripted shows that debuted
• For White households, ratings peaked during
across all platforms — a figure significantly
the 2015-16 season for broadcast scripted
greater than the shares they posted for either
shows with casts greater than 40 percent
the broadcast, cable or digital arenas in 2015-16.
minority
Women, by contrast, lost ground among leads
• Social media engagement during the 2015-16 in these new shows. Meanwhile, among the
season peaked for broadcast scripted shows creators of these new shows, both people of
with casts that reflected the diversity of color and women lost ground relative to their
America shares of show creators for the 2015-16 television
season.
• Median Black household ratings peaked for
cable scripted shows with casts that were
majority minority in 2015-16
• For viewers 18-49, White, Latino, and Asian
households, median ratings peaked in the
cable scripted arena for shows with casts that
were from 31 to 40 percent minority in 2015-16
• Social media engagement peaked for cable
scripted shows with casts that were at least 31
percent minority in 2015-16
• The majority of the top 10 broadcast scripted
shows among viewers 18-49 and Asian, Black,
and Latino households, as well as half of
the top 10 shows among White households,
featured casts that were at least 21 percent
minority in 2015-16
5
I N T RO D U C T I O N
Hollywood Diversity Report 2018

This report is the fifth in a series of annual studies originally conceived by the Ralph
J. Bunche Center for African American Studies at UCLA to explore the relationships
between diversity and the bottom line in the Hollywood entertainment industry.
The current report is the first in the series to be administered by the Institute for
Research on Labor and Employment (IRLE) in UCLA’s Division of Social Sciences.
The Division of Social Science’s larger Hollywood Advancement Project, from

which this report stems, has three primary goals: 1) to generate comprehensive
research analyses of the inclusion of diverse groups in film and television, including
lead roles, writing, directing, producing, and talent representation; 2) to identify
and disseminate best practices for increasing the pipeline of underrepresented
groups into the Hollywood entertainment industry; and 3) to consider the broader
implications of diverse industry access and media images for society as a whole.
6
The Data Data for this report were compiled from a
variety of sources that industry stakeholders
The Hollywood Diversity Report 2018 examines rely upon for day-to-day updates on industry
174 theatrical films released in 2016,1 as well as developments. These sources include The Studio
1,251 television shows airing or streaming during System, Variety Insight, the Internet Movie
the 2015-16 season.2 The television shows were Database (IMDb), Nielsen, Rentrak and Box Office
distributed across six broadcast networks, 65 Mojo.
cable networks, and 37 digital platforms. (see
Table 1, Appendix). They were sorted into the
following categories for analysis: 113 broadcast
scripted shows; 76 broadcast reality and other
shows; 184 cable scripted shows; 637 cable reality
and other shows; 127 digital platform scripted
shows; and 114 digital platform reality and other
shows.3 Variables considered in the analyses for
this report include the following:
• Racial status of lead talent
• Gender of lead talent
• Overall cast diversity
• Show creator racial status
• Show creator gender
• Show locations
• Writer diversity
• Director diversity
• Genres
• Talent agency representation
• Oscar and Emmy awards
• Nielsen viewer and social media ratings4
• Global and domestic box office
• International market distribution
• Rentrak ticket buyer demographics
7
H O L LY WO O D
LANDSCAPE
“Hollywood” is a bustling creative community composed of talented men and women
who work both in front of and behind the camera to produce the major, commercial
theatrical films and television shows that reflect and shape American culture. In 2016, the
global box office for theatrical films reached $38.6 billion, a one percent increase over
the previous year, and people of color reported higher per capita movie attendance
than White Americans.5 Meanwhile, American television continued to feature what many
have described as a “renaissance”6 in quality programming during the 2015-16 season.
An explosion in the creation of original content by dozens of cable networks and digital
streaming platforms made space for viewing options that were not possible in an earlier
era dominated by a handful of broadcast networks.
Traditionally associated with the Los Angeles region, the Hollywood industry has for
years produced films shot in locations scattered around the globe, even as Southern
California-based studios defined the center of gravity for these productions. By contrast,
the production of television shows in the contemporary era tended to be tethered
more to the Los Angeles region, to its ample supply of studio sets, iconic locations, and
dense network of support services. About a decade ago, the phenomenon of “runaway
production”7 marked a decline in Los Angeles’s share of television productions, as the
attractiveness of New York, Atlanta and Toronto increased for producers. Atlanta,
for example, eventually became a hotbed of production centered around African
American-themed content. However, California’s Film and Television Tax Credit Program
2.0, which was signed in 2014, tripled production incentives in the state and may
eventually result in a return of lost production to Los Angeles.8
The following charts focus on the distribution of television locations during the
2015-16 season.
8
FIGURE 1: Share by Location, Broadcast Scripted Shows,
2015-16 Season (n=96)
Remaining Los Angeles’s share of broadcast scripted show

30.8% locations declined from 53 percent during the 2014-15
television season to 48.5 percent in 2015-16. Over the
LA same period, New York City’s share increased from 11
48.5% percent to 15.5 percent.
Atlanta NYC
3.1% 15.5%
Toronto
2.1%
FIGURE 2: Share by Location, Cable Scripted Shows,

2015-16 Season (n=138)
Los Angeles’s share of cable scripted show locations also Remaining
declined, from 44.2 percent during the 2014-15 television season 31.9% LA
to 37.7 percent in 2015-16. Meanwhile, Atlanta nearly doubled its 37.7%
share, from 5.8 percent to 10.7 percent.
NYC
14.8%
Atlanta
10.7%
Toronto
4.9%
FIGURE 3: Share by Location, Digital Scripted Shows,

2015-16 Season (n=29)
Remaining
Los Angeles accounted for 40.4 percent of
31.9%
LA digital scripted show locations during the 2015-
40.4% 16 television season, followed by New York City,
which claimed a 27.7 percent share.
NYC
27.7%
9
FIGURE 4: Share by Location, Broadcast Reality and Other Shows,
2015-16 Season (n=23)
Remaining
8.7%
Los Angeles’s share of

NYC broadcast reality and other
26.1% show locations declined from
70.6 percent during the 2014-
15 television season to 65.2
LA
percent in 2015-16. Over the
65.2%
same period, New York City’s
share increased from 20.6
percent to 26.1 percent.
FIGURE 5: Share by Location, Cable Reality and Other Shows,

2015-16 Season (n=155)
LA
Los Angeles’s share of cable reality 27.7%
and other show locations declined
from 41.6 percent during the 2014-
15 television season to just 27.7 Remaining
percent in 2015-16. These losses 54.9%
became gains for several of the
remaining locations in 2015-16. NYC
17.4%
10
GENRE
The biggest takeaways with respect to genre since the last report are the continuing
importance of drama in film and broadcast television, the sustained dominance of
reality in cable television, and the rise of comedy in digital television. It is also worth
noting that the number of digital shows examined more than doubled between the
2014-15 and 2015-16 seasons, from just 95 shows to 241 shows.
FIGURE 1: Percentage Distribution of Top Films by Genre,

2015 and 2016 (n=168, 174)
30%
2015
25% 24.1% 2016
20%
15%
10% 9.2% 8.6%
5%
0%
y
An ary
Ro al
ts
a
cu ror
ily
ce
er
ed
i-F
le
as
ur
am
tio
im
io
ic
or
th
m
an
ril
m
Sc
t
Do Hor
nt
nt
at
us
Cr
en
Sp
Ac
Dr
Fa
O
Th
m
Co
im
Fa
ve
M
m
Ad
Drama remained the largest genre for theatrical films in 2016,

despite declining since the last report from 27.9 percent to 24.1
percent of the total. The animation and thriller genres posted
notable increases, from 6 percent to 9.2 percent of the total
and from 4.8 percent to 8.6 percent, respectively.
12
FIGURE 2: Broadcast TV by Genre, 2015-16 Season (n=189)
Comedy
Reality 17.5% The drama genre increased its plurality
25.4% share of broadcast television shows
between the 2014-15 and 2015-16 seasons
— from 40.6 percent to 42.3 percent.
The comedy genre declined from 18.4
percent to 17.5 percent of the total.
Other Drama
14.8% 42.3%
FIGURE 3: Cable TV by Genre, 2015-16 Season (n=821)

Comedy
9.9%
The largest genre in cable
television, reality, remained Drama
steady at 66.6 percent of the 12.5%
total between the 2014-15 and
2015-16 seasons.
Other
Reality 11%
66.6%
FIGURE 4: Digital Platform TV by Genre, 2015-16 Season (n=241)
Reality The comedy genre increased its

20.3% share of digital shows from 30.5
Comedy
percent to 33.2 percent between
33.2%
the 2014-15 and 2015-16 television
seasons, while the drama genre saw
its share decline from 28.4 percent to
Other 19.5 percent.
27%
Drama
19.5%
13
LEADS
Lead actors9 are significant figures in film and television because the storytelling,
more often than not, revolves around the characters they play. These central
characters are usually the protagonists, and it is their hopes, fears, and
achievements that drive their respective project’s narratives. As documented
throughout this report series, women and people of color have been significantly
underrepresented as leads in Hollywood films and television shows over the years.
The following charts reveal that in most arenas women and minorities posted
meaningful gains in their shares of leads relative to males and Whites, respectively,
compared to a year earlier. Nonetheless, both groups were still a long way from
reaching proportionate representation in most arenas in 2016.
FIGURE 1: Leads by Race, Top Theatrical Films, 2011 - 2016

(n=172, 172, 174, 163, 168, 173)
100% 89.5%
84.9% 87.1% 86.4% 86.1%
People of color accounted 83.3%
for 13.9 percent of the leads 80% White
in top films for 2016, virtually Minority
unchanged from their 13.6
60% U.S. population
percent share a year earlier.
They would have to triple 38.7%
their 2016 share to reach 40%
proportionate representation
15.1% 16.7% 13.6% 13.9%
(38.7 percent). 20% 10.5% 12.9%
0%
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Only 1.4 out of 10 lead actors in film are people of color

14
FIGURE 2: Leads by Gender, Top Theatrical Films, 2011 - 2016
(n=172, 172, 174, 163, 168, 173)
100% Male
80% 74.4% 74.7% 74.2% Female

69.2% 71.0% 68.8%
60%
Women accounted for 31.2
40% 30.8% 29.0% 31.2% percent of the leads in top
25.6% 25.3% 25.8%
films for 2016, a slight increase
20% over their 29 percent share a
year earlier. They would have
0% to multiply their 2016 share by
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 1.6 to reach parity with men.
FIGURE 3: Leads by Race, Broadcast Scripted, 2011-12 to

2015-16 Seasons (n=99, 107, 122, 123, 112)
People of color have nearly
quadrupled their share of 94.9% 93.5%
100% 91.9% 88.6%
broadcast scripted leads
over the course of this report 81.3%
White
series — from 5.1 percent 80%
during the 2011-12 season Minority
to 18.7 percent in 2015-16. 60% U.S. population
Nonetheless, they would
have to double their 2015- 38.7%
40%
16 share in order to reach
proportionate representation 18.7%
(38.7 percent). 20% 8.1% 11.4%
5.1% 6.5%
0%
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
FIGURE 4: Leads by Gender, Broadcast Scripted, 2011-12 to

2015-16 Seasons (n=99, 107, 122, 123, 112)
100% Male
80% Female
64.2% 61.8% 64.3%
60% 51.5% 51.4%
48.5% Women’s share of broadcast

40% 48.6%
scripted leads has held largely
35.8% 38.2% 35.7% steady for the past three
20% television seasons, most
recently at 35.7 percent for 2015-
0% 16, after the group momentarily
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 reached parity in 2011-12.
15
FIGURE 5: Leads by Race, Cable Scripted, 2011-12 to
2015-16 Seasons (n=156, 166, 181, 202, 183)
People of color accounted 100%

for 20.2 percent of the cable 85.3% 83.4% 84.2%
80.7% 79.8% White
scripted leads during the
80%
2015-16 television season, Minority
up from their 15.8 percent
share a season earlier. They 60% U.S. population
would have to nearly double 38.7%
their 2015-16 share to reach 40%
19.3% 16.6% 20.2%
(38.7 percent). 14.7% 15.8%
20%
0%
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
FIGURE 6: Leads by Gender, Cable Scripted, 2011-12 to

2015-16 Seasons (n=156, 167, 181, 202, 183)
100% Male
80% Female
66.9% 64.4%
62.8% 62.9%
60% 55.2%
Women have closed the

40% 44.8% gender gap considerably with
37.2% 37.1% 35.6% respect to cable scripted leads,
33.2%
20% increasing their share from
35.6 percent during the 2014-
0% 15 television season to 44.8
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 percent in 2015-16.
FIGURE 7: Leads by Race, Digital Scripted Shows, 2013-14 to

2015-16 Seasons (n=33, 54, 116)
Though people of color 100% 90.9% 88.9%

increased their share of digital 87.1%
scripted leads from 9.1 percent White
80%
during the 2013-14 television Minority
season to 12.9 percent in
2015-16, they would have to 60% U.S. population
triple the latter share to reach 38.7%
proportionate representation 40%
(38.7 percent).
20% 11.1% 12.9%
9.1%
0%
2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
16
FIGURE 8: Leads by Gender, Digital Scripted Shows, 2013-14 to
2015-16 Seasons (n=34, 54, 116)
100% Male
80% Female
64.7% 64.8%
56.9%
60%
Women have closed the gender
40% gap somewhat with respect to
43.1%
35.3% 35.2% digital scripted leads, increasing
20% their share from 35.3 percent
during the 2013-14 television
0% season to 43.1 percent in 2015-16.
2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
FIGURE 9: Lead Talent by Race, Broadcast Reality and Other

Shows, 2011-12 to 2015-16 (n=104, 92, 72, 75, 64)
People of color nearly 100%

doubled their share of lead 84.6% 84.8% 83.3%
talent for broadcast reality 76% 73.4% White
80%
and other shows over the Minority
run of this report series,
approaching proportionate 60% U.S. population
representation at 26.6 percent 38.7%
of the total for the 2015-16 40%
television season.
20% 24% 26.6%
15.4% 15.2% 16.7%
0%
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
FIGURE 10: Lead Talent by Gender, Broadcast Reality and Other

Shows, 2011-12 to 2015-16 (n=106, 93, 72, 75, 64)
100% Male
84% 81.3%
79.2% Female
80% 75.5% 74.2%
60%
Women’s share of lead talent
for broadcast reality and other
40% shows declined from 24.5 percent
24.5% 25.8%
20.8% 18.8% during the 2011-12 television
16%
Women would have to nearly
0% triple this latter share to reach
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 parity with men.
17
FIGURE 11: Lead Talent by Race, Cable Reality and Other Shows,
2011-12 to 2015-16 (n=463, 560, 482, 485, 420)
Though people of color’s 100%

share of lead talent for cable 86.8% 83.2% 84.1% 83.9%
reality and other shows has 79.1% White
80%
steadily increased over the Minority
run of this report series,
the group’s 2015-16 share 60% U.S. population
(20.9 percent) would have 38.7%
to nearly double before the 40%
group reached proportionate 20.9%
representation (38.7 percent). 16.8% 15.9% 16.1%
20% 13.2%
0%
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
FIGURE 12: Lead Talent by Gender, Cable Reality and Other

Shows, 2011-12 to 2015-16 (n=520, 573, 482, 488, 420)
100% Male
75.1% 78.3% Female
80% 69.4% 72.6% 70.2%
60%
After rebounding from a low of
21.7 percent during the 2014-15
40% 30.6% 27.4% 29.8% television season, women’s share
24.9% 21.7% of lead talent for cable reality
20% and other shows was virtually the
same in 2015-16 (29.8 percent) as
0% it was four seasons earlier in 2011-
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 12 (30.6 percent).
18
OV E RA L L C A S T
DIVERSITY
This section documents overall cast diversity for top films in 2016 and the broadcast,
cable and digital television shows airing or streaming during the 2015-16 season. For
the purpose of analysis, it assigns each film and scripted television show to one of
six distinct diversity intervals based on the racial and ethnic statuses of its top eight
credited actors — casts that were 10 percent minority or less; 11 percent to 20 percent
minority; 21 percent to 30 percent minority; 31 percent to 40 percent minority; 41
percent to 50 percent minority; or 51 percent minority and over. This section also
provides total actor counts by race and gender for all films, all scripted broadcast
shows, all scripted cable shows, and all scripted digital shows.
The following charts reveal that there have been some notable advances in overall
cast diversity for film, broadcast television and cable television in recent years. For
digital television, by contrast, overall cast diversity has been relatively stagnant,
despite the tremendous increase in new digital shows since the last report. Women
and people of color (with the exception of Black men in broadcast and cable) remained
underrepresented among all actors in 2016 films and 2015-16 television shows.
20
FIGURE 1: Minority Cast Share, by Share of Top Theatrical Films,
2011 - 2016 (n=172, 172, 174, 162, 169, 173)
60%
51.2%
50%
40% 37%
The share of the top films with

30% casts that were 10 percent
minority or less decreased
from more than half in 2011
20%
(51.2 percent) to 37 percent
in 2016. Over the same
9.9% 9.8% period, the share of films with
10%
majority-minority casts held
steady — 9.9 percent in 2011
0% and 9.8 percent in 2016.
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
10% or less 11% to 20% 21% to 30%
31% to 40% 41% to 50% 51% and over
FIGURE 2: Share of Film Roles, by Race, 2016 (n=1,352)
Mixed
3% Native
Asian
0.5%
3.1%
Whites were overrepresented Latino
among all top film roles in 2.7%
2016, claiming 78.1 percent
of the roles but constituting
just 61.3 percent of the U.S. Black
population. At 13.3 percent of the 12.5%
population, Blacks approached
proportionate representation,
claiming 12.5 percent of the roles.
All other minority groups were
significantly underrepresented.
White
78.1%
21
FIGURE 3: Film Actor Counts, by Race and Gender, 2016 (n=1,352)
700 668 Male

For most racial and
ethnic groups, women 600 Female
were significantly
underrepresented 500
among the actors 388
featured in the top 400
films from 2016.
300
200
105
100 64
24 13 32 10 22 19
4 3
0
White Black Latino Asian Mixed Native
FIGURE 4: Minority Cast Share, by Share of Broadcast Scripted Shows,

2011-12 to 2015-16 Seasons (n=99, 107, 121, 123, 112)
60%
50%
40%
The share of broadcast scripted
30.8% shows with casts that were 10
30% percent minority or less decreased
significantly over the run of this
report series, from a peak of 30.8
20% 17.9% percent of all shows during the
16.1%
2012-13 television season to just
16.1 percent in 2015-16. Meanwhile,
10%
the share of broadcast scripted
2% shows with majority-minority casts
0% exploded from just 2 percent in
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2011-12 to 17.9 percent in 2015-16.
10% or less 11% to 20% 21% to 30%

31% to 40% 41% to 50% 51% and over
22
FIGURE 5: Minority Cast Share, by Share of Cable Scripted Shows,
2011-12 to 2015-16 Seasons (n=152, 167, 177, 202, 183)
60%
50%
40%
The share of cable
scripted shows with
30% majority-minority casts
increased from just 8.4
percent of all shows
20% during the 2011-12
14.8%
television season to 14.8
8.4% percent in 2015-16.
10%
0%
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
10% or less 11% to 20% 21% to 30%
31% to 40% 41% to 50% 51% and over
FIGURE 6: Minority Cast Share, by Share of Digital Scripted Shows,

2012-13 to 2015-16 Seasons (n=11, 34, 54, 116)
60%
50%
45.5%
42.2%
40%
Across the four television
seasons examined, the
30% plurality of digital scripted
shows had casts that were
10 percent minority or
20% less (from 45.5 percent in
2012-13 to 42.2 percent in
2015-16).
10%
0%
2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
10% or less 11% to 20% 21% to 30%
31% to 40% 41% to 50% 51% and over
23
FIGURE 7: Share of Roles, by Race, Broadcast Scripted Shows,
2015-16 Season (n=732)
Mixed Native
0%
Asian 6%
Whites’ share of broadcast 5%
scripted roles decreased from Latino
76 percent during the 2014-15 6%
television season to 66 percent in
2015-16, which was slightly above
for the group. Meanwhile,
Blacks were overrepresented Black
among actors in broadcast 17%
White
scripted shows in 2015-16,
66%
claiming 17 percent of the roles.
All other minority groups were
underrepresented.
FIGURE 8: Share of Roles, by Gender, Broadcast Scripted Shows,

2015-16 Season (n=733)
Women’s share of
broadcast scripted
roles remained virtually
unchanged between
the 2014-15 and 2015-16
Female television seasons (43
44% percent and 44 percent,
Male respectively).
56%
Mixed Native
Asian 3.6% 0.3%
2.6%
FIGURE 9: Share of Roles, by Race, Cable Scripted Shows, Latino
2015-16 Season (n=1057) 5.6%
Whites’ share of cable scripted roles decreased

from 79 percent during the 2014-15 television Black
season to 74.6 percent in 2015-16. Meanwhile, 13.3%
Blacks achieved proportionate representation
among actors in cable scripted shows in 2015-
16, claiming 13.3 percent of the roles. All other
minority groups were underrepresented. White
74.6%
24
FIGURE 10: Share of Roles, by Gender, Cable Scripted Shows,
2015-16 Season (n=1057)
Women’s share of cable

scripted roles held steady
between the 2014-15
and 2015-16 television
seasons (41 percent and 42
Female percent, respectively).
42%
Male
58%
FIGURE 11: Share of Roles, by Race, Digital Scripted Shows, Mixed Native
Asian 2.7% 0.2%
2015-16 Season (n=517) 5.8%
Latino
Whites’ share of digital 5%
scripted roles remained
virtually unchanged
between the 2014-15 and
2015-16 television seasons Black
(74 percent and 75.4 10.8%
percent, respectively).
All other racial and
ethnic groups were
underrepresented among White
these roles. 75.4%
FIGURE 12: Share of Roles, by Gender, Digital Scripted Shows,

2015-16 Season (n=518)
Women’s share of digital

scripted roles was
essentially flat between
the 2014-15 and 2015-16
television seasons (43
Female percent and 44 percent,
44% respectively).
Male
56%
25
FIGURE 13: Actor Counts, by Race and Gender, Broadcast Scripted
Roles, 2015-16 Season (n=732)
500
Male
For Whites and Blacks, women Female
trailed their male counterparts 400
with respect to the number of
broadcast scripted roles in the 300 283
2015-16 season. For other racial
and ethnic groups, women either 202
claimed the majority of roles 200
or approached parity with their
male counterparts. 76
100
47
20 26 20 17 13 28
0
FIGURE 14: Actor Counts, by Race and Gender, Cable Scripted

500 469 Male
Female For White, Black, Asian, and
400 Native actors, women trailed
319 their male counterparts with
300 respect to the number of cable
scripted roles in the 2015-
16 season. Women claimed
200 the majority of roles among
mixed-race actors, while Latinas
85 approached parity with their
100 56 male counterparts.
31 28 17 27
11 11 3
0
FIGURE 15: Actor Counts, by Race and Gender, Digital Scripted

500
Male
For White, Black, and Asian Female
actors, women trailed their male 400
counterparts with respect to the
number of digital scripted roles 300
in the 2015-16 season. Women
claimed the majority of roles 219
among mixed-race actors, while 200 171
Latinas approached parity with
their male counterparts.
100
34 22 19
14 12 11 4 10 1
0
26
D I R E C TO R S
In the arena of Hollywood films, the director is the artist whose vision brings a script
to life by molding actors’ performances into compelling narratives and by making
the aesthetic choices that define a project’s essence. In television, which is more of
a writer’s medium, directors are typically hired by a showrunner to direct a specified
number of episodes for a show, usually in accordance with a look and feel that has
already been established.
People of color and women, as previous reports in this

series document, have faced an uphill battle when
attempting to land directing jobs in film and television.
The charts in this section consider the degree to
which there has been any movement on this front in
recent years. They reveal that the only arena in which
there has been any significant progress is for women
film directors, though women were still woefully
underrepresented in this arena. Meanwhile, women
have gained little ground among the ranks of television
directors, and people of color were still significantly
underrepresented among directors in both television
and film.
28
FIGURE 1: Director Race, Top Theatrical Films, 2011 - 2016
(n=172, 172, 174, 163, 168, 174)
100% 89% 89.9%

There was virtually no change 87.8% 87.1% 87.4%
82.2%
in people of color’s share of White
80%
directors for the top films
between 2011 and 2016 — 12.2 Minority
percent and 12.6 percent, 60% U.S. population
respectively. Minorities 38.7%
would have to multiply their 40%
2016 share by three to reach
proportionate representation 17.8%
20% 12.2% 11% 12.9% 10.1% 12.6%
among film directors (38.7
percent).
0%
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Only 1.3 out of 10 film directors are people of color
FIGURE 2: Director Gender, Top Theatrical Films, 2011 - 2016

(n=172, 167, 174, 163, 168, 174)
100% Male
95.9% 94.2% 93.7% 95.7% 92.3% 93.1%
80% Female
60%
Though women’s share of directors
40% for the top films increased more than
50 percent between 2011 and 2016
20% (from 4.1 percent to 6.9 percent),
4.1% 5.8% 6.3% 4.3% 7.7% 6.9%
women would have to multiply their
0% 2016 share of directors by more than
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 seven to reach parity with men.
Less than 1 out of 10 film directors are female

29
51% and over
41 to 50% 3% FIGURE 3: Percent of Episodes Directed by Minorities, by
4%
31 to 40% Share of Broadcast Scripted Shows, 2015-16 Season (n=110)
8%
For more than half of the broadcast scripted shows from

the 2015-16 season (52 percent), people of color directed
21 to 30% 10 percent or fewer of the episodes.
8%
10% or less
52%
11 to 20%
25%
51% and over

5%
FIGURE 4: Percent of Episodes Directed by Women, 41 to 50%
6%
by Share of Broadcast Scripted Shows, 2015-16 Season (n=110)
For nearly two-thirds of the broadcast scripted shows from 31 to 40%

the 2015-16 season (64 percent), women directed 20 percent 11% 10% or less
or fewer of the episodes. 32%
21 to 30%
14%
11 to 20%
32%
51% and over FIGURE 5: Percent of Episodes Directed by Minorities,

41 to 50%
7%
2% by Share of Cable Scripted Shows, 2015-16 Season (n=169)
31 to 40%
2%
21 to 30%
5%
For more than two-thirds
of cable scripted shows
from the 2015-16 season (69
11 to 20% percent), people of color
15% directed 10 percent or fewer
of the episodes.
10% or less
69%
30
FIGURE 6: Percent of Episodes Directed by Women,
by Share of Cable Scripted Shows, 2015-16 Season (n=169)
51% and over
41 to 50% 2%
3%
31 to 40%
8%
For more than half of the

cable scripted episodes
21 to 30%
10%
percent), women directed
10 percent or fewer of the
episodes. 10% or less
54%
11 to 20%
23%
FIGURE 7: Percent of Episodes Directed by Minorities,

by Share of Digital Scripted Shows, 2015-16 Season (n=91)
51% and over

14%
41 to 50%
1%
31 to 40%
0%
21 to 30% For nearly three quarters of
1% the digital scripted episodes
11 to 20% percent), people of color
10% directed 10 percent or fewer
of the episodes.
10% or less
74%
31
FIGURE 8: Percent of Episodes Directed by Women, by Share of
Digital Scripted Shows, 2015-16 Season (n=91)
51% and over

12%
41 to 50%
1%
31 to 40%
For more than two- 4%
thirds of the digital
scripted shows from
the 2015-16 season 21 to 30%
(68 percent), women 8%
directed 10 percent or 11 to 20%
fewer of the episodes. 7% 10% or less
68%
32
TV SHOW
CREATORS
TV show creators are the writers who successfully pitch the idea for a show to
a network, studio or talent agency. By doing so, they set in motion a host of
production decisions that ultimately impact the degree of diversity in casting and
writer staffing. Previous reports in this series show that women and people of
color have been marginalized in the show creation process relative to their male
and White counterparts. The following charts reveal significant progress in recent
years for women and people of color among the ranks of show creators in digital
scripted television, modest progress for minorities in broadcast, and stagnation for
both minorities and women in cable. On nearly every front, both groups remained
significantly underrepresented among show creators during the 2015-16 season.
FIGURE 1: Show Creators by Race, Broadcast Scripted,

2011-12 to 2015-16 Seasons (n=96, 102, 120, 125, 112)
Though people of color’s 100%

share of broadcast scripted
95.8% 94.1% 96.7% 92% 92.9% White
show creators increased
80%
nearly three percentage Minority
points between the 2011-
12 and 2015-16 television 60% U.S. population
seasons — from 4.2 percent 38.7%
to 7.1 percent — the group 40%
would have to multiply its
2015-16 share by more than
20% 8.0%
five to reach proportionate 4.2% 5.9% 3.3% 7.1%
representation (38.7 percent).
0%
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
34
FIGURE 2: Show Creators by Gender, Broadcast Scripted,
2011-12 to 2015-16 Seasons (n=96, 102, 120, 125, 112)
100% Male
78.5% 77.6% 77.9% Female
80% 73.5% 71.2%
60%
Women’s share of broadcast scripted
show creators remained flat between
40% 28.9% the 2014-15 and 2015-16 television
26.5%
21.5% 22.4% 22.1% seasons (22.4 percent and 22.1 percent,
20% respectively), after declining from a
high of 28.9 percent in 2012-13. Women
0% would have to more than double their
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2015-16 share to reach parity with men.
FIGURE 3: Show Creators by Race, Cable Scripted,

2011-12 to 2015-16 Seasons (n=148, 159, 180, 200, 179)
People of color’s share of 100%

cable scripted show creators
was largely flat over the five 92.6% 89.3% 92.2% 92.5% 92.7% White
80%
television seasons examined Minority
— 7.4 percent in 2011-12 and
7.3 percent in 2015-16. They 60% U.S. population
would have to multiply their 38.7%
2015-16 share by more than 40%
5 to reach proportionate
20% 10.7%
7.4% 7.8% 7.5% 7.3%
0%
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
FIGURE 4: Show Creators by Gender, Cable Scripted,

2011-12 to 2015-16 Seasons (n=149, 159, 181, 201, 183)
100% Male
81.8% 83.1%
78.5% 77.4% 79.1% Female
80%
60%
Women’s share of cable scripted
show creators declined over the
40% five television seasons examined,
21.5% 22.6% 20.9% from 21.5 percent in 2011-12 to just
18.2% 16.9%
20% 16.9 percent in 2015-16. Women
would have to nearly triple their
0% 2015-16 in order to reach parity
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 with men.
35
FIGURE 5: Show Creators by Race, Digital Scripted,
2013-14 to 2015-16 Seasons (n=32, 54, 108)
People of color more than 100%

doubled their share of digital
scripted show creators 93.8% 94.4% White
80%
over the three television 84.3%
Minority
seasons examined, from
just 6.2 percent in 2013-14 60% U.S. population
to 15.7 percent in 2015-16. 38.7%
Nonetheless, minorities 40%
would have to more than
double their 2015-16 share 15.7%
20%
to reach proportionate 6.2% 5.6%
0%
2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
FIGURE 6: Show Creators by Gender, Digital Scripted,

2013-14 to 2015-16 Seasons (n=32, 54, 111)
100% Male
84.4%
79.6% Female
80% 68.5%
60%
Women more than doubled their
40% 31.5% share of digital scripted show
20.4% creators over the three television
20% 15.6%
seasons examined, from 15.6
percent in 2013-14 to 31.5 percent
0% in 2015-16.
2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
36
WRITERS
At the heart of the Hollywood enterprise is storytelling, and it is writers who create
the characters whose stories animate the big and small screen. Previous reports
in this series document that White males have dominated this artistic realm in
Hollywood — a fact that is clearly associated with the less-than-robust depictions
of women and people of color plaguing the most conventional projects, or the
absence of their stories altogether. As the following charts reveal, only women
achieved significant gains among Hollywood writers in recent years, and this was
in a single arena, digital scripted television shows. In the other arenas for women,
and in all arenas for people of color, progress was minimal, at best. Both groups
remained underrepresented among the ranks of writers in 2015-16.
FIGURE 1: Writer Race, Top Theatrical Films, 2011 - 2016

(n=172, 167, 170, 163, 168, 173)
100%
People of color’s share of 94.7%
the writers credited for 92.4% 92.2% 88.2% 92% 91.9% White
80%
top films increased only Minority
minimally over the five
60% U.S. population
years examined, from
7.6 percent in 2011 to 8.1 38.7%
percent in 2016. Minorities 40%
would have to multiply
their 2016 share by nearly 20% 11.8%
7.6% 7.8% 8% 5.3% 8.1%
5 to reach proportionate
representation (38.7
0%
percent). 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
38
FIGURE 2: Writer Gender, Top Theatrical Films, 2011 - 2016
(n=170, 169, 170, 163, 168, 174)
100% Male
80% 90.8% Female

85.9% 87% 87.1% 87% 86.2%
60%
Women’s share of the writers
40% credited for top films was essentially
flat over the five years examined —
20% 14.1% 13% 12.9% 13% 13.8% 14.1 percent in 2011 and 13.8 percent
9.2%
in 2016. Women would have to
0% multiply their share by more than 3 to
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 reach parity with men.
FIGURE 3: Minority Share of Writing Credits, by Share of

Broadcast Scripted Shows, 2015-16 Season (n=109)
51% and over
41 to 50% 3%
4%
31 to 40%
4%
People of color’s share of writing credits for broadcast scripted
shows increased a bit between the 2014-15 and 2015-16 television
seasons. The movement was between shows in the 10 percent or
less and 21 percent to 30 percent categories. Minorities penned 21 to 30%
between 21 percent and 30 percent of the episodes for 16 percent 16%
of broadcast scripted shows in 2015-16, up from just 11 percent 10% or less
of the shows a season earlier. Meanwhile, they were credited for 47%
writing 10 percent or less of the episodes for 47 percent of the
shows in 2015-16, down from more than half of the shows in 2014-
15 (52 percent). The overall minority share of credited writers for 11 to 20%
broadcast scripted shows in 2015-16 was 15.5 percent, up from 13.4 26%
percent a season earlier. People of color would have to more than
double this share to reach proportionate representation among
credited writers in the broadcast scripted arena.
39
FIGURE 4: Female Share of Writing Credits, by Share of Broadcast
Scripted Shows, 2015-16 Season (n=109)
10% or less
51% and over 6%
13%
Women’s share of writing credits for broadcast scripted

shows changed only marginally between the 2014-15
11 to 20%
and 2015-16 television seasons. Women penned the
18%
majority of the episodes for 13 percent of broadcast
scripted shows in 2015-16, compared to 17 percent of the
41 to 50% shows a season earlier. Meanwhile, they were credited
22% with writing 10 percent or less of the episodes for only 6
21 to 30% percent of the shows in 2015-16, compared to 8 percent
21% of the shows in 2014-15. The overall female share of
credited writers for broadcast scripted shows in 2015-16
31 to 40% was 35.2 percent, virtually unchanged from the 35.9
20% percent figure posted a season earlier.
FIGURE 5: Minority Share of Writing Credits, by Share of Cable

51% and over
41 to 50% 5%
31 to 40% 2%
3%
21 to 30%
7%
People of color’s share of writing credits for cable scripted
shows increased only marginally between the 2014-15 and 2015-
16 television seasons. Minorities penned between 11 percent
and 20 percent of the episodes for 22 percent of cable scripted
shows in 2015-16, up from 17 percent of the shows a season 11 to 20%
earlier. Meanwhile, they were credited for writing 10 percent or 22%
less of the episodes for 61 percent of the shows in 2015-16, down 10% or less
from 66 percent of the shows in 2014-15. The overall minority 61%
share of credited writers for cable scripted shows in 2015-16 was
11.1 percent, up slightly from the group’s 10.6 percent share a
season earlier. People of color would have to nearly quadruple
this share to reach proportionate representation among
credited writers in the cable scripted arena.
40
FIGURE 6: Female Share of Writing Credits, by Share of Cable
51% and over

11%
Women’s share of writing credits for cable scripted

10% or less
shows increased slightly between the 2014-15 and 2015-16
19%
television seasons. Women penned 10 percent or less
41 to 50% of the episodes for 19 percent of cable scripted shows
17% in 2015-16, down from 22 percent of the shows a season
11 to 20% earlier. Meanwhile, they were credited with writing 31
15% percent to 40 percent of the episodes for 21 percent
of the shows in 2015-16, up from just 16 percent of the
31 to 40% shows in 2014-15. The overall female share of credited
21% 21 to 30% writers for cable scripted shows in 2015-16 was 31.5
17% percent, up a bit from the 30.6 percent share the group
claimed in 2014-15.
FIGURE 7: Minority Share of Writing Credits, by Share of Digital

51% and over
6%
41 to 50%
7%
31 to 40%
4%
People of color’s share of writing credits for
digital scripted shows was flat between the 21 to 30%
2014-15 and 2015-16 television seasons. Minorities 4%
penned the majority of the episodes for only
6 percent of the shows in 2015-16, and they
11 to 20%
were credited for writing 10 percent or less
13% 10% or less
of the episodes for two-thirds of the shows.
The overall minority share of credited writers 66%
for digital scripted shows in 2015-16 was 10.7
percent, virtually unchanged from the group’s
10.8 percent share a season earlier. People of
color would have to more than triple this share
to reach proportionate representation.
41
FIGURE 8: Female Share of Writing Credits, by Share of Digital
Women’s share of writing credits for digital scripted shows

increased significantly between the 2014-15 and 2015-16
television seasons. The primary movement was between
51% and over shows in the 51 percent and over, 41 percent to 50 percent,
20% and 11 percent to 20 percent categories. Women were credited
10% or less with writing the majority of the episodes for 20 percent of
34% digital scripted shows in 2015-16, up from just 13 percent of the
shows in 2014-15. They also penned 41 percent to 50 percent
41 to 50%
of the episodes for 16 percent of digital scripted shows in
16%
2015-16, up from 13 percent a season earlier. Meanwhile, they
were credited with writing 11 percent to 20 percent of the
episodes for just 11 percent of the shows in 2015-16, down from
11 to 20%
31 to 40% 11% 23 percent of the shows in 2014-15. The overall female share
12% of credited writers for digital scripted shows in 2015-16 was
32.5 percent, up more than 5 percentage points from the 27.3
percent figure posted in 2014-15.
21 to 30%
7%
42
G AT E K E E P E R S
As intermediaries between Hollywood’s artists and its studios and networks, talent
agencies play a pivotal role in deciding who will participate in telling the popular
stories that circulate in our nation’s entertainment media. Increasingly, the power to
make these decisions has been concentrated in just three dominant agencies, large
corporate entities that in recent years have focused on expanding their sources of
revenue and reach through mergers and acquisitions. An earlier report in this series
reveals that 96.7 percent of the partners running these dominant talent agencies were
White, as were 90.8 percent of the agents brokering the deals. The occupants of these
important positions were also disproportionately male, 71.4 percent of the partners
and 68.1 percent of the agents.10 The outsized role of White males at the dominant
agencies is key because these agencies function as brokers who “package” together
the source material and talent that ultimately constitute the film and television
projects greenlighted by Hollywood’s studios and television networks. The lack of
agent diversity in the process most certainly affects the types of packages the three
dominant talent agencies are predisposed to initiate.
The following charts compare the three dominant talent agencies to the two dozen
or so smaller, remaining agencies with respect to the directors, writers, and leads on
their respective rosters who were credited for 2016 films and 2015-16 television shows.
Since the previous report, the three dominant talent agencies have increased their
combined shares of most film and television talent, while talent of color remained
severely underrepresented on the rosters of these powerful industry gatekeepers.
44
FIGURE 1: Dominant Agency Share of Directors, Top Theatrical
Films, 2011 - 2016 (n=172, 152, 153, 145, 152, 159)
100% 88.8% 88.7% Dominant

85.5% 82.4% 78.6% Remaining
80% 70%
60%
The share of directors from top films in 2016
40% 30% who were represented by one of the three
17.6% 21.4% dominant talent agencies remained virtually
20% 14.5% 11.2% 11.3% unchanged since the last year considered
in the previous report (88.8 percent in 2015,
0% compared to 88.7 percent in 2016), after rising
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 steadily from 70 percent in 2011.
FIGURE 2: Minority Share of Directors, Dominant vs. Remaining Agencies,

Top Theatrical Films, 2011 - 2016 (n=172, 152, 153, 145, 152, 159)
People of color were 100%
underrepresented among the
directors of the top films in 80% Dominant
2016 — particularly among Remaining
those on the rosters of the three
60% U.S. population
dominant agencies, where they
accounted for only 11.3 percent 38.7%
of the credited directors. 40%
Minorities would have to more 20% 33.3% 22.2%
than triple their 2016 share 20%
of directors at the dominant 11.3%
agencies in order to reach
0% 9%
proportionate representation 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
(38.7 percent).
FIGURE 3: Dominant Agency Share of Leads, Top Theatrical Films,

2011 - 2016 (n=172, 159, 165, 154, 160, 169)
100% 89.1% Dominant

84.4% 85.2%
79.9% 81.2%
80% 72.1% Remaining
60%
The share of leads from top films
40% 27.9% who were represented by one
21.1% 18.8% of the three dominant talent
20% 15.6% 14.8%
10.9% agencies has steadily increased
over the course of this report
0% series, from 72.1 percent in 2011
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 to 85.2 percent in 2016.
45
FIGURE 4: Minority Share of Leads, Dominant vs. Remaining Agencies,
underrepresented among
the leads from the top films 80% Dominant
in 2016 at both the dominant Remaining
and remaining talent agencies,
60% 50% U.S. population
accounting for just 12.5 percent
and 16 percent of credited 38.7%
leads, respectively. Minorities 40%
would have to more than 18.8%
triple their 2016 share of leads 16.0%
20%
at the dominant agencies in
order to reach proportionate 7.3% 12.5%
0%
representation (38.7 percent). 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
FIGURE 5: Dominant Agency Share of Writers, Top Theatrical

Films, 2011 - 2016 (n=172, 151, 152, 138, 153, 154)
100% Dominant
80.4% 81.2%
74.8% 76.3% Remaining
80% 71%
65.1%
60%
34.9% The share of writers credited for

40% 29% top films who were represented by
25.2% 23.7% 19.6% 18.8% one of the three dominant talent
20% agencies has increased markedly
over the course of this report
0% series, from 65.1 percent in 2011 to
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 81.2 percent in 2016.
FIGURE 6: Minority Share of Writers, Dominant vs. Remaining Agencies,

underrepresented among the
writers credited for top films in 80% Dominant
2016, particularly among those Remaining
on the rosters of the remaining
60% U.S. population
agencies, where minorities
constituted just 3.4 percent of 38.7%
the writers. They would have 40%
to multiply their 2016 share
by nearly 5 at the dominant 20% 10.5%
agencies and by more than 11 8%
at the remaining agencies in 6.3% 3.4%
0%
order to reach proportionate 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
46
FIGURE 7: Agency Share of Show Creators, Dominant vs. Remaining Agencies,
Broadcast Scripted, 2011-12 to 2015-16 Seasons (n=99, 92, 105, 116, 101)
100% Dominant
85.5% 84.2%
77.2% 80% Remaining
80% 73.7%
60%
The share of broadcast scripted show
40% creators who were represented by one of
26.3% 22.8% 20% the three dominant talent agencies has
15.5% 15.8%
20% steadily increased over the course of this
report series, from 73.7 percent during
0% the 2011-12 television season to 84.2
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 percent in 2015-16.
FIGURE 8: Minority Share of Show Creators, Dominant vs. Remaining Agencies,

Broadcast Scripted, 2011-12 to 2015 -16 Seasons (n=99, 92, 105, 116, 101)
underrepresented among
broadcast scripted show 80% Dominant
creators for the 2015-16 season, Remaining
particularly among those on
60% U.S. population
the rosters of the dominant
agencies, where minorities 38.7%
constituted just 5.2 percent 40%
of the show creators. They 23.5%
would have to multiply this 20% 14.3% 11.1% 12.5%
9.5%
share by more than 7 to reach 1.4% 4.2%
proportionate representation 8.2% 5.2%
0% 2.4%
at the dominant agencies (38.7 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
percent).
FIGURE 9: Agency Share of Show Creators, Dominant vs. Remaining Agencies,

Cable Scripted, 2011-12 to 2015-16 Seasons (n=139, 143, 156, 177, 163)
100% Dominant
78.2% 75.7% 77.3% Remaining
80% 70.5% 69.2%
60%
The share of cable scripted show creators
40% 29.5% 30.8% who were represented by one of the three
21.8% 24.3% 22.7% dominant talent agencies increased from
20% 70.5 percent during the 2011-12 television
season to 77.3 percent in 2015-16.
0%
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
47
FIGURE 10: Minority Share of Show Creators, Dominant vs. Remaining
Agencies, Cable Scripted, 2011-12 to 2015 -16 Seasons (n=139, 143, 156, 177, 163)
underrepresented among cable
scripted show creators for the 80% Dominant
2015-16 season — a finding reflected Remaining
on the rosters of the dominant
60% U.S. population
and remaining talent agencies,
where minorities constituted just 38.7%
8.7 percent and 2.7 percent of the 40%
credited show creators, respectively.
Minorities would have to multiply 12.2% 15.9%
20% 8.8% 8.2% 8.7%
their 2015-16 share by more than 4
at the dominant agencies and more 6.1% 9.1% 7.4% 7% 2.7%
0%
than 14 at the remaining agencies 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
in order to reach proportionate
FIGURE 11: Agency Share of Show Creators, Dominant vs. Remaining

Agencies, Digital Scripted, 2013-14 and 2015-16 Seasons (n=23, 35, 72)
100%
Dominant
82.6%
80% Remaining
68.6% 68.1%
60%
The share of digital scripted show
40% 31.4% 31.9% creators who were represented by
one of the three dominant talent
17.4% agencies declined from 82.6 percent
20%
during the 2013-14 television season
to 68.1 percent in 2015-16.
0%
2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
FIGURE 12: Minority Share of Show Creators, Dominant vs. Remaining

Agencies, Digital Scripted, 2013-14 and 2015-16 Seasons (n=23, 35, 72)
100%
Dominant
80% Remaining
U.S. population
Though people of color were
60%
underrepresented among all
digital scripted show creators 38.7%
for the 2015-16 season, they 40%
fared better on the rosters of the
17.4%
remaining talent agencies, where 20%
they constituted 17.4 percent of 5.3% 4.2%
the credited show creators. 10.2%
0%
2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
48
FIGURE 13: Agency Share of Leads, Dominant vs. Remaining Agencies, Broadcast
Scripted, 2011-12 to 2015-16 Seasons (n=99, 104, 112, 117, 111)
100% Dominant
80% Remaining
69.2% 70.3%
63.4% 65%
55.6%
60%
40% 44.4% leads who were represented by
36.6% 35.0% one of the three dominant talent
20% 30.8% 29.7% agencies increased from 55.6
percent during the 2011-12 television
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16

Broadcast Scripted, 2011-12 to 2015-16 Seasons (n=99, 104, 112, 117, 111)
Though people of color remain 100%
underrepresented among all
broadcast scripted leads, they have 80% Dominant
gained ground at the dominant Remaining
agencies, nearly quadrupling
60% U.S. population
their share of credited leads from
just 5.5 percent for the 2011-12 38.7%
season to 20.5 percent in 2015-16. 40%
Nonetheless, they would have to 20.5%
nearly double their 2015-16 share 15.8%
20% 9.9%
in order to reach proportionate 5.5% 6.3%
15.2%
0% 2.4%
representation (38.7 percent). 5.6% 4.9%
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
FIGURE 15: Agency Share of Leads, Dominant vs. Remaining Agencies,

100% Dominant
80% Remaining
54% 56.3% 53.4%

60% 50.7% 47.6%
The share of cable scripted leads who
40% 46% 49.3% 46.6% 52.4%
43.7% were represented by one of the three
dominant talent agencies has held
20% largely steady over the course of this
report series — 46 percent during the
0% 2011-12 television season, compared to
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 47.6 percent in 2015-16.
49
People of color have slowly 100%
increased their shares of the
credited leads on the rosters of 80% Dominant
both the dominant and remaining Remaining
agencies since the 2011-12 season. By
60% U.S. population
2015-16, the minority share of cable
scripted leads was 18.6 percent at 38.7%
the dominant agencies and 20.5 40%
percent at the remaining agencies. 20% 20.5% 20.5%
Minorities would have to double 16% 16.9%
20%
their 2015-16 share of leads at both 17.9% 18.6%
dominant and remaining agencies 13% 15.1% 15.6%
0%
in order to reach proportionate 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
FIGURE 17: Agency Share of Leads, Dominant vs. Remaining Agencies,

Digital Scripted, 2013-14 to 2015-16 Seasons (n=27, 44, 93)
100%
Dominant
80% Remaining
63%
59.1%
60% 53.8%
The share of digital scripted leads
40% 46.2% who were represented by one of
40.9% the three dominant talent agencies
37%
20% declined from 63 percent during
the 2011-12 television season to 46.2
percent in 2015-16.
0%
2013-14 2014-15 2015-16

Digital Scripted, 2013-14 to 2015-16 Seasons (n=27, 44, 93)
100%
Dominant
People of color have nearly
doubled their share of the digital 80% Remaining
scripted leads on the rosters U.S. population
of the dominant agencies over 60%
the seasons examined — from
5.9 percent in 2013-14 to 11.6 38.7%
percent in 2015-16. Nonetheless,
40%
minorities would have to more 22.2%
than triple their 2015-16 share 20% 10% 14%
in order to reach proportionate
representation (38.7 percent). 5.9% 7.7% 11.6%
0%
2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
50
AC C O L A D E S
Each year, the film and television academies celebrate
talent associated with the big-screen and small-screen
projects that members identify as the pinnacles of
artistic achievement. As discussed in earlier reports
in this series, these annual rituals matter because the
accolades bestowed by the academies set standards
that help shape the types of prestige projects industry
decision makers are likely to greenlight in the future.
To the extent that women and people of color are
marginalized at the Oscars and Emmys, they are also
likely to be only peripheral players in the favored
projects that make it to film and television.
The charts that follow examine how projects anchored

by female and minority talent fared at the Oscars in 2017
and Emmys in 2016.11 They reveal some gains for talent
of color at the Oscars since the last report, but little
movement at the Emmys. Meanwhile, though women lost ground at the Oscars,
they succeeded in closing the huge gender gap at the Emmys a bit.
52
FIGURE 1: Oscar-Winning Films, by Director Race, Theatrical Films,
2011 - 2016 (n=11, 11, 8, 12, 11, 10)
100%
100% White
80%
90.9% 83.3% 81.8% 80%
75% Minority The share of films with at least one
60% Oscar winner that were also directed
by a person of color increased from
40% none in 2011 to 20 percent of all
25% Oscar-winning films in 2016.
18.2% 20%
16.7%
20% 9.1%
0%
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
FIGURE 2: Oscar-Winning Films, by Director Gender, Theatrical

Films, 2011 - 2016 (n=11, 11, 8, 12, 11, 10)
100% Male
100% 100% 100%
The share of films with 80% 90.9% 90.9% 91.7% Female
at least one Oscar
winner that were also 60%
directed by a woman has
remained flat at none
for the past two years 40%
examined.
20% 9.1% 9.1% 8.3%
0%
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
FIGURE 3: Oscar-Winning Films, by Lead Actor Race, Theatrical

Films, 2011 - 2016 (n=11, 11, 8, 12, 11, 10) The share of films with at least one
Oscar winner that also featured a
100% person of color lead increased from
none in 2011 to 40 percent of all
100% 90.9% White
80% Oscar-winning films in 2016.
81.8% 83.3%
75% 60% Minority
60%
40%
25% 40%
18.2% 16.7%
20% 9.1%
0%
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
53
FIGURE 4: Oscar-Winning Films, by Lead Actor Gender, Theatrical
Films, 2011 - 2016 (n=11, 11, 8, 12, 11, 10)
100% Male
82% 83.3% 80%
80% 72.7% Female
The share of films with at least 72.7%
one Oscar winner that also
featured a female lead was 60%
roughly the same in 2016 as it
was in 2011 (20 percent versus 50%
18 percent), after women-led 40%
films briefly reached parity
with male-led films in 2013. 20% 27.3% 27.3%
18% 16.7% 20%
0%
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
FIGURE 5: Likelihood of Winning Oscar, by Minority Cast Share,

The likelihood12 that a film would win at
Theatrical Films, 2015 and 2016 least one Oscar was highest in 2015 for
films with casts that were from 11 percent
10% or less 11% to 20% 21% to 30% to 20 percent minority (10.3 percent
31% to 40% 41% to 50% 51% and over chance), followed by those that were
20% from 41 percent to 50 percent minority
17.6% (10 percent chance). In 2016, films with
majority-minority casts were most likely
15% to win at least one Oscar (17.6 percent
10.3% 10% chance), largely due to the success of
10% Moonlight.
5%
0%
2015 2016
FIGURE 6: Emmy-Winning Shows, by Creator Race, Broadcast

shows with at least one Emmy
100%
winner that were also created by 100%
80% 90.9% White
a person of color increased from 83.3%
none in 2011-12 to 20 percent in 80% 80% Minority
2014-15 and 2015-16. 60%
40%
16.7% 20% 20%
20% 9.1%
0%
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
54
FIGURE 7: Emmy-Winning Shows, by Creator Gender, Broadcast
100% 100%
Male
80% 90% Female
80% 81.8%
60%
50% The share of broadcast scripted
40% shows with at least one Emmy
winner that were also created
20% 18.2% by a woman was only 10 percent
20% 10% in 2015-16, after peaking at 50
0% percent three seasons earlier in
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2012-13.
FIGURE 8: Emmy-Winning Shows, by Creator Race,

100%
Over the five seasons
100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
examined in this report White
series, no cable scripted 80%
show created by a Minority
person of color has one 60%
at least one Emmy.
40%
20%
0%
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
FIGURE 9: Emmy Winners by Creator Gender, Cable Scripted,

2011-12 to 2015-16 Seasons (n=7, 9, 7, 10, 15)
The share of cable scripted
100% Male shows with at least one
100% Emmy winner that were also
80% 90% Female created by a woman was only
85.7% 86.7% 13.3 percent in 2015-16, up
77.8%
from the zero percent share
60% posted in 2011-12, but down
from the 22.2 percent share
40% attained in 2012-13.
22.2%
14.3% 13.3%
20% 10%
0%
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
55
FIGURE 10: Likelihood of Winning Emmy, by Minority Cast Share,
Broadcast Scripted, 2011-12 to 2015-16 Seasons
10% or less 11% to 20% 21% to 30%
31% to 40% 41% to 50% 51% and over The likelihood that a broadcast scripted
show would win at least one Emmy
45% during the 2015-16 season was similar
40% for shows with various levels of overall
40%
35% cast diversity — narrowly ranging from
a 10 percent chance to a 11.1 percent
30% 25% chance for four of the six diversity
25%
intervals. During the 2014-15 season, by
20%
12.5% 13.3% 11.1% 11.1% contrast, broadcast scripted shows with
15% 11.8% casts from 41 percent to 50 percent
8.8% 10.5% 10%
10% minority were far and away the most
5% likely to win at least one Emmy (40
0% percent chance).
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
FIGURE 11: Likelihood of Winning Emmy, by Minority Cast Share,

Cable Scripted, 2011-12 to 2015-16 Seasons
10% or less 11% to 20% 21% to 30%
The likelihood that a cable scripted
show would win at least one Emmy 31% to 40% 41% to 50% 51% and over
during the 2015-16 season was highest
for shows with casts that were 10 16%
percent minority or less (12.3 percent 13.9%
14%
chance). A year earlier, cable scripted
12.3%
12%
shows with casts from 11 percent to 20
10% 8.5%
percent minority held this distinction 7.7% 7.7%
(13.9 percent chance). 8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
56
THE BOTTOM LINE
Previous releases in the Hollywood Diversity Report series
present evidence supporting the idea that diversity sells
when it comes to industry-produced films and television
shows. People of color constituted nearly 40 percent of the
U.S. population in 2016, and their share is growing by nearly
half a percent each year. Increasingly diverse audiences, the
evidence shows, prefer film and television content populated
with characters to whom they can relate and whose stories
drive the narrative. Europe accounted for only about 7 percent
of the world’s population13 and 17 percent of the world’s gross
domestic product (GDP)14 in 2016, which underscores the
reality that today’s (and tomorrow’s) global market looks
much more like the diversity of America than the White
audiences that traditionally drove Hollywood’s greenlighting practices. In short,
the previous reports in this series dispel a stubborn Hollywood myth that in order
to reach the widest audiences possible, films and television shows must center
White characters in their narratives and relegate racial and ethnic others to, at best,
supporting roles.
This report adds to the growing body of evidence that diversity is essential for
Hollywood’s bottom line. As the charts below document, global box office and
television ratings, on average, are highest for films and television shows with
relatively diverse casts. Indeed, a consideration of top 10 films and television
shows underscores how important diverse audiences have become as drivers of
box office and ratings, and that these highly engaged audiences prefer diverse
content. But the charts also reveal missed opportunities. For example, we see
below that Hollywood continues to produce a plurality of films and television shows
with casts that are 10 percent minority or less, despite the fact that these projects
are collectively among the poorest performers. It also appears as if the industry
undersells the relatively small number of films with diverse leads and casts in a
global market that is primed to connect with them.
58
FIGURE 1: Global Box Office (000,000s), by Minority Cast Share,
200
$180.8
Median global box office
$160.1 peaked for films with casts
$143.3 that were from 21 percent to
150 30 percent minority in 2016
$130.5
$122.2 ($180.8 million), the same
diversity interval for which
$105
global box office peaked in
100 2015 ($105 million).
50
0 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

10% or less 11% to 20% 21% to 30%
31% to 40% 41% to 50% 51% and over
FIGURE 2: Return on Investment, by Minority Cast Share, Top Theatrical

Films, 2011 - 2016 (n=160, 147, 153, 162, 168, 173)
5
5
4
Global return on investment15
3.4 peaked for films with casts that
2.9 were from 41 percent to 50
3
2.5 percent minority in 2016 (2.9).
2.2 In 2015, the last year examined
2.1
in the previous report, the
2
peak interval for return on
investment contained films
with casts that were from
1 21 percent to 30 percent
minority.
0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
10% or less 11% to 20% 21% to 30%
31% to 40% 41% to 50% 51% and over
59
FIGURE 3: Domestic Film Performance, by Minority Cast Share,
Top Theatrical Films, 2016 (n=172)
80 In 2016, films with casts that were

domestic (000,000)
from 21 percent to 30 percent
70 mean theaters (00) minority had the highest median
$62.5
mean opening rank domestic box office ($62.5 million),
60
were released in the most theaters,
50 on average (3,190), and had the
$42.1 highest mean opening weekend
40 rank (4.7). Films with majority-
31.9 minority casts had the second-
30 highest median domestic box office
23.8 in 2016 ($42.1 million) and a mean
20 opening weekend rank of 5.9 —
despite being released in fewer
10 4.7 5.9 theaters, on average (2,380), than
the films in all but one of the other
0 intervals.
10% or less 11 to 20% 21 to 30% 31 to 40% 41 to 50% 51% and over
FIGURE 4: Film Distribution in China, by Race of Lead, Top

Theatrical Films, 2016 (n=149, 17, 1, 3, 3)
100% 94.1% Yes

Of the 17 top films with Black No
leads in 2016, only one (5.9 80%
percent) was distributed in
China, The Take (originally titled 60% 59.1%
Bastille Day). By contrast, 40.9
percent of the top 149 films with 40.9%
White leads were distributed 40%
in China that year. Only a
handful of the top 173 films 20%
from 2016 had leads from other
5.9%
underrepresented groups.
0%
White Black Latino Asian Mixed
60
TABLE 1: Median Box Office and Mean International Markets, The 17 top films from 2016 featuring Black
leads were released in just 35.2 international
by Race of Lead (2016) markets, on average, compared to an
average of 55.1 international markets for the
149 top films with White leads. The median
Race of Lead Actor N Global Box Office Mean International global box office for the Black-led films
Films (000,000s) Markets was nonetheless comparable to that of
the films with White leads ($55 million and
White 149 $62.3 55.1 $62.3 million, respectively). Meanwhile, the
Black 17 $55.0 35.2 relatively high box office and international
Latino 1 $4.7 22.0 market figures for films with Asian and
mixed-race leads were powered by just four
Asian 3 $140.1 61.0 successful 2016 releases: The Jungle Book,
Mixed Race 3 $217.0 51.7 Moana, Central Intelligence, and Lion.
In 2016, the 31 top films with TABLE 2: Median Box Office and Mean International
casts that were from 21 percent
to 30 percent minority posted
Markets, by Overall Cast Diversity (2016)
both the highest median
global box office ($179.2
million) and largest average
Percent Minority N Global Box Office Mean International
number of international
Films (000,000s) Markets
markets (65.6). By contrast, 10% or less 64 $38.4 49.6
the 17 top films with majority-
minority casts were released in 11%-20% 35 $37.6 55.1
the smallest average number 21%-30% 31 $179.2 65.6
of markets (32.4).
31%-40% 15 $125.7 58.4
41%-50% 11 $88.4 55.5
Over 50% 17 $55.0 32.4
TABLE 3: Median Box Office and Audience Demographics, by Overall

Cast Diversity (2016)
Percent N Global Box White Black Latino Asian
Minority Films (000,000s) Share Share Share Share Movies with casts that were
20 percent minority or less
10% or less 64 $38.4 61.0% 10.8% 19.1% 9.0%
made up a majority of all
11%-20% 35 $37.6 56.9% 12.6% 21.1% 9.4% movies in 2016 and had the
21%-30% 31 $179.2 53.6% 14.1% 21.1% 11.2% lowest global box office
31%-40% 15 $125.7 52.3% 16.6% 21.1% 10.0%
41%-50% 11 $88.4 51.5% 15.9% 23.2% 9.3%
Over 50% 17 $55.0 34.9% 39.2% 18.5% 7.3%
The plurality of the top 173 films for 2016 had casts that were 10 percent minority or less. These 64 films also
had the lowest median global box office ($38.4 million), and White moviegoers constituted 61 percent of their
audience. By contrast, people of color represented 38.7 percent of the U.S. population in 2016 but nearly half
(46.4 percent) of the audience for the top films that year with casts from 21 percent to 30 percent minority —
the cast diversity interval containing films with the highest median global box office.
61
TABLE 4: Top 10 Films and Minority Cast Share (2016)
Rank Title Box Office Return* Minority Minority
(000,000s) audience cast share
share
In 2016, people of color 1 Captain America: Civil War $1,153.3 31% 54% 31% to 40%
purchased the majority of 2 Rogue One: A Star Wars Story $1,056.1 52% 40% Over 50%
the tickets for five of the top
3 Finding Dory $1,028.6 47% 54% 10% or less
10 films, ranked by global
box office, matching the 4 Zootopia $1,023.8 95% 50% 21% to 30%
number for 2015 observed 5 The Jungle Book $966.6 57% 56% Over 50%
in the previous report. This 6 The Secret Life of Pets $875.5 234% 51% 21% to 30%
includes 54 percent of the
tickets for the top-ranked 7 Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice $873.3 -1% 59% 11% to 20%
film, Captain America: 8 Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them $814.0 27% 37% 10% or less
Civil War, which earned 9 Deadpool $783.1 255% 50% 31% to 40%
nearly $1.2 billion globally.
10 Suicide Squad $745.6 22% 48% 41% to 50%
Five of top 10 films for 2016
featured casts that were at *Studio System’s Box Office Return on Investment is calculated from domestic and international
least 31 percent minority. theatrical ticket sales against the cost of making and marketing the film.
FIGURE 5: Median Ratings by Minority Cast Share, 18-49 and HH

Race, Broadcast Scripted, 2015-16 Season (n=109)
During the 2015-16 television season,
median Black household ratings
5 4.67 (4.67), Latino household ratings (2.16),
4.36 Asian household ratings (2.92), and
18-49 viewer ratings (1.78) peaked
4 for broadcast scripted shows with
casts that were from 21 percent to
2.92 30 percent minority. It should be
3 noted that for each of these groups,
shows falling in the majority-minority
2.16
interval had the second-highest
2 1.78
median ratings. Meanwhile, White
household ratings (4.36) peaked
for shows with casts that were from
1 41 percent to 50 percent minority,
though shows falling in the 11 percent
to 20 percent minority and 21 percent
0 to 30 percent minority intervals
18-49 White Black Latino Asian followed closely behind.
10% or less 11% to 20% 21% to 30%
31% to 40% 41% to 50% 51% and over
62
FIGURE 6: Median Tweets and Authors (000), by Minority Cast
Share, Broadcast Scripted Shows, 2015-16 Season (n=106)
10
During the 2015-16 television
season, the median volume of 9 8.6 8.5
tweets16 peaked for broadcast
scripted shows with casts 8
that were from 21 percent to
7
30 percent minority (8,600),
followed closely by shows with 6
casts that were from 31 percent
to 40 percent minority (8,500). 5
The median number of unique
4
Twitter authors was highest for
shows in the same cast diversity 3 2.6 2.4
intervals, 2,600 and 2,400 2.3
authors, respectively. 2
1
0
Tweets Authors
10% or less 11% to 20% 21% to 30%

31% to 40% 41% to 50% 51% and over
FIGURE 7: Median Ratings, by Minority Cast Share, 18-49 and HH

Race, Cable Scripted Shows, 2015-16 Season (n=182)
1.40
In the cable television arena, median
18-49 viewer ratings (.21), White
1.19 household ratings (.45), Latino
1.20
household ratings (.26), and Asian
household ratings (.27) all peaked
for scripted shows with casts that
1.00 were from 31 percent to 40 percent
minority. For Black households, ratings
peaked for cable scripted shows with
.80 majority-minority casts (1.19).
.60
0.45
.40
0.26 0.27
0.21
.20
0
18-49 White Black Latino Asian
10% or less 11% to 20% 21% to 30%

31% to 40% 41% to 50% 51% and over
63
FIGURE 8: Median Tweets and Authors (000), by Minority Cast
Share,Cable Scripted Shows, 2015-16 Season (n=181)
4.5
4.0
4.0
3.5 During the 2015-16 television
season, the median volume of
3.0 tweets peaked for cable scripted
shows with casts that were
2.5
from 31 percent to 40 percent
2.0 minority (4,000). The median
number of unique Twitter
1.5 1.2
authors was highest for cable
scripted shows with majority-
1.0 minority casts (1,200).
0.5
0
Tweets Authors
10% or less 11% to 20% 21% to 30%

31% to 40% 41% to 50% 51% and over
TABLE 5: Top 10 broadcast scripted shows among persons 18-49, 2015-16.

Rank Show Network 18-49 White HHs Female Avg. tweets Minority
rating share 18-49 share (000s) cast share
1 Empire Fox 6.21 23% 64% 386.9 51% & over
2 The Big Bang Theory CBS 5.85 84% 55% 4.9 11% - 20%
3 The X-Files Fox 4.81 76% 48% 95.1 10% or less
Six of the top 10
broadcast scripted 4 Grey’s Anatomy ABC 3.76 73% 76% 99.9 31% - 40%
shows among viewers 5 Scandal ABC 3.51 58% 75% 133.4 21% - 30%
18-49 in 2015-16 had 6 How to Get Away w/Murder ABC 3.49 57% 74% 55.7 41% - 50%
casts that were at least
7 Blindspot NBC 3.20 76% 58% 5.9 51% & over
21 percent minority,
including the top- 8 NCIS CBS 3.14 84% 58% 8.7 11% - 20%
ranked show, Empire 9 Modern Family ABC 2.99 78% 59% 2.6 11% - 20%
(Fox), which featured a
10 The Blacklist NBC 2.81 78% 55% 9.4 21% - 30%
majority-minority cast.
64
TABLE 6: Top 10 broadcast scripted shows among Asian households, 2015-16 season.
Rank Show Network Asian HHs White HHs Female Avg. tweets Minority
1 Empire Fox 8.16 23% 64% 386.9 51% & over
Seven of the top 10
broadcast scripted 2 The Big Bang Theory CBS 8.05 84% 55% 4.9 11% - 20%
shows among 3 The X-Files Fox 6.64 76% 48% 95.1 10% or less
Asian households 4 The Blacklist NBC 5.89 78% 55% 9.4 21% - 30%
in 2015-16 had
casts that were at 5 Blindspot NBC 5.56 76% 48% 5.9 51% & over
least 21 percent 6 Quantico ABC 5.54 71% 65% 8.3 21% - 30%
minority. 7 Fresh Off the Boat ABC 5.52 66% 57% 2.0 51% & over
8 NCIS CBS 5.29 84% 58% 8.7 11% - 20%
9 How to Get Away w/Murder ABC 5.25 57% 74% 55.7 41% - 50%
10 Scandal ABC 5.13 58% 75% 133.4 21% - 30%
TABLE 7: Top 10 broadcast scripted shows among Black households, 2015-16 season.
Rank Show Network Black HHs White HHs Female Avg. tweets Minority
Nine of the top 10
broadcast scripted
1 Empire Fox 48.01 23% 64% 386.9 51% & over shows among
2 Scandal ABC 18.89 58% 75% 133.4 21% - 30% Black households
3 How to Get Away w/Murder ABC 18.19 57% 74% 55.7 41% - 50% in 2015-16 had casts
that were at least 21
4 Rosewood Fox 14.97 43% 64% 5.9 51% & over percent minority.
5 Uncle Buck ABC 10.68 47% 59% 6.7 51% & over
6 Grey’s Anatomy ABC 9.41 73% 76% 99.9 31% - 40%
7 The Catch ABC 8.14 68% 71% 7.0 41% - 50%
8 NCIS CBS 8.00 84% 58% 8.7 11% - 20%
9 American Crime ABC 7.51 64% 65% 8.5 31% - 40%
10 Shades of Blue NBC 7.49 72% 61% 10.2 51% & over
TABLE 8: Top 10 broadcast scripted shows among Latino households, 2015-16 season.
Rank Show Network Latino White Female Avg. Minority
Six of the top 10 HHs HHs 18-49 tweets cast share
rating share share (000s)
broadcast scripted
shows among 1 Empire Fox 8.02 23% 64% 386.9 51% & over
Latino households 2 The Big Bang Theory CBS 5.20 84% 55% 4.9 11% - 20%
in 2015-16 had casts 3 Grey’s Anatomy ABC 4.65 73% 76% 99.9 31% - 40%
that were at least 21
percent minority. 4 Shades of Blue NBC 4.63 72% 61% 10.2 51% & over
5 The X-Files Fox 4.59 76% 48% 95.1 10% or less
7 Scandal ABC 3.88 58% 75% 133.4 21% - 30%
8 How to Get Away w/Murder ABC 3.85 57% 74% 55.7 41% - 50%
9 NCIS CBS 3.61 84% 58% 8.7 11% - 20%
10 Scream Queens Fox 3.48 61% 64% 91.5 11% - 20%
65
TABLE 9: Top 10 broadcast scripted shows among White households,
2015-16 season.
White White HHs Female Avg. tweets Minority
Five of the top 10 Rank Show Network HHs rating share 18-49 share (000s) cast share
broadcast scripted 1 NCIS CBS 15.85 84% 58% 8.7 11% - 20%
shows among 2 The Big Bang Theory CBS 15.43 84% 55% 4.9 11% - 20%
White households
3 NCIS: New Orleans CBS 9.41 82% 58% 2.0 41% - 50%
in 2015-16 had casts
that were at least 21 4 The X-Files Fox 9.14 76% 48% 95.1 10% or less
percent minority. 5 Grey’s Anatomy ABC 8.51 73% 76% 99.9 31% - 40%
Meanwhile, White 6 The Blacklist NBC 8.36 78% 55% 9.4 21% - 30%
households
constituted the only 7 The Good Wife CBS 8.16 82% 63% 5.0 11% - 20%
group among those 8 Blue Bloods CBS 8.08 81% 59% 9.2 11% - 20%
examined for which 9 Chicago Fire NBC 8.02 78% 65% 12.2 31% - 40%
Empire — which
featured a Black
lead and majority-
minority cast — was
not in the top 10.
TABLE 10: Top 10 cable scripted shows among persons 18-49, 2015-16 season. Five of the top 10 cable
scripted shows among
18-49 White HHs Female Avg. tweets Minority viewers 18-49 in 2015-16
Rank Show Network rating share 18-49 share (000s) cast share had casts that were at
least 21 percent minority.
1 The Walking Dead AMC 1.56 67% 46% 320.1 21% - 30%
The Walking Dead and
2 American Crime Story FX 0.97 63% 53% 23.0 31% - 40% American Crime Story —
3 American Horror Story FX 0.92 65% 59% 82.7 10% or less both shows featuring casts
4 Fear the Walking Dead AMC 0.72 70% 47% 34.1 51% & over that were at least 21 percent
minority — were the only
5 Game of Thrones HBO 0.66 70% 42% 282.4 10% or less
cable scripted shows that
6 The Librarians TNT 0.59 79% 54% 10.2 11% - 20% appeared on each of the
7 Into the Badlands AMC 0.55 60% 39% 17.1 31% - 40% top 10 lists for viewers
8 Switched at Birth Freeform 0.54 69% 83% 5.3 11% - 20% 18-49, Asian households,
Black households, Latino
9 Teen Wolf MTV 0.54 49% 57% 103.9 31% - 40% households, and White
10 Rizzoli & Isles TNT 0.49 82% 68% 5.7 11% - 20% households.
66
TABLE 11: Top 10 cable scripted shows among Asian households, 2015-16 season.
Rank Show Network Asian HHs White HHs Female Avg. tweets Minority cast
rating share 18-49 share (000s) share
Six of the
top 10 cable
scripted shows 2 American Crime Story FX 1.21 63% 53% 23.0 31% - 40%
among Asian 3 The Librarians TNT 1.02 79% 54% 10.2 11% - 20%
households in 4 Game of Thrones HBO 0.97 70% 42% 282.4 10% or less
2015-16 had casts
that were at 5 American Horror Story FX 0.95 65% 59% 82.7 10% or less
least 21 percent 6 The Last Ship TNT 0.82 76% 45% 3.8 21% - 30%
minority. 7 Into the Badlands AMC 0.82 60% 39% 17.1 31% - 40%
8 Fear The Walking Dead AMC 0.75 70% 47% 34.1 51% & over
9 Rizzoli & Isles TNT 0.74 82% 68% 5.7 11% - 20%
10 Bella and the Bulldogs Nick 0.72 53% 60% 0.4 41% - 50%
TABLE 12: Top 10 cable scripted shows among Black households, 2015-16 season.
Rank Show Network Black HHs White HHs Female Avg. tweets Minority cast
rating share 18-49 share (000s) share Eight of the top
1 Being Mary Jane BET 4.38 5% 77% 47.0 51% & over 10 cable scripted
shows among
2 Greenleaf OWN 3.76 9% 73% 23.5 51% & over Black households
3 The Haves and Have Nots OWN 3.00 12% 70% 26.3 51% & over in 2015-16 had casts
4 If Loving You Is Wrong OWN 2.63 10% 74% 12.4 51% & over that were at least 21
percent minority,
5 American Crime Story FX 2.57 63% 53% 23.0 31% - 40%
including five shows
6 Zoe Ever After BET 1.93 5% 69% 4.2 51% & over with majority-
7 The Walking Dead AMC 1.81 68% 46% 320.1 21% - 30% minority casts on
8 Decker: Unclassified Adult Swim 1.71 54% 45% 34.1 10% or less BET and OWN.
9 Bella and the Bulldogs Nick 1.70 53% 60% 0.4 41% - 50%
10 Childrens Hospital Cartoon 1.65 56% 45% 0.1 10% or less
67
TABLE 13: Top 10 cable scripted shows among Latino households, 2015-16 season.
Rank Show Network Latino White Female Avg. tweets Minority
HHs rating HHs share 18-49 share (000s) cast share
3 Henry Danger Nick 1.23 53% 62% .5 11% - 20%
Six of the top 10 4 American Horror Story FX 1.23 65% 59% 82.7 10% or less
cable scripted 5 Girl Meets World Disney 1.17 51% 66% 8.6 10% or less
shows among Latino
6 Liv and Maddie Disney 1.15 51% 67% 2.5 11% - 20%
households in 2015-16
had casts that were 7 BUNK’D Disney 1.14 51% 66% 1.4 51% & over
at least 21 percent 8 The Thundermans Nick 1.14 53% 63% .4 31% - 40%
minority. 9 Bella and the Bulldogs Nick 1.13 53% 60% .4 41% - 50%
10 K.C. Undercover Disney 1.12 49% 65% 1.1 51% & over
TABLE 14: Top 10 cable scripted shows among White households, 2015-16 season.
Rank Show Network White HHs White Female Avg. Minority Five of the top 10 cable
rating HHs 18-49 tweets cast share scripted shows among
share share (000s) White households in
1 The Good Witch Hallmark 2.54 87% 75% 1.6 10% or less 2015-16 had casts that
were at least 21 percent
2 Rizzoli & Isles TNT 2.34 82% 68% 5.7 11% - 20% minority.
3 When Calls the Heart Hallmark 2.06 89% 77% 96.9 10% or less
4 Major Crimes TNT 1.80 79% 65% 1.4 31% - 40%
6 The Librarians TNT 1.62 79% 54% 10.2 11% - 20%
7 Chesapeake Shores Hallmark 1.61 86% 76% 5.1 10% or less
9 The Last Ship TNT 1.34 76% 45% 3.8 21% - 30%
10 Murder in the First TNT 1.12 74% 56% 2.7 41% - 50%
68
NEW SHOWS:
2017-18
While the earlier findings in this report for television provide a retrospective look at
the relationships between diversity and the bottom line during the 2015-16 season, this
section looks ahead to new shows airing or streaming during the 2017-18 television
season in order to consider the prospects for further improvements on the diversity
front. The charts that follow reveal the prognosis is mixed with respect to this question.
Whereas the shares of new shows with majority-minority casts and leads of color were
higher across all platforms than during the 2015-16 season, the share of new shows with
women leads was smaller. Meanwhile, among the creators of the new shows, women lost
ground relative to their shares of show creators for 2015-16.
70
Black FIGURE 1: Show Creator Race, New Scripted Shows,
8.9 2017-18 Season (n=45)
Show creators of color were responsible for

only 8.9 percent of the new scripted shows
debuting in the 2017-18 television season, and all
of these show creators were Black. This figure
exceeds those people of color collectively
White posted for broadcast scripted or cable scripted
91.1% shows in 2015-16 (7.1 percent and 7.3 percent,
respectively), but trailed the figure for digital
scripted shows that season (15.7 percent).
FIGURE 2: Show Creator Gender, New Scripted Shows,

2017-18 Season (n=45) Female
15.6%
Women show creators were responsible

for only 15.6 percent of the new scripted
shows debuting in the 2017-18 television
season. This figure represents a step
backwards for women in this arena, as
Male
the group’s share of show creators in
84.4%
the broadcast scripted, cable scripted,
and digital scripted arenas were all
higher during the 2015-16 season.
Mixed
4%
Latino FIGURE 3: Lead Actor Race, New Scripted Shows,

4%
2017-18 Season (n=50)
Black
20% People of color constituted 28 percent of the
leads for new scripted shows debuting in the
2017-18 television season, a figure significantly
White greater than those observed during the 2015-16
72% season for broadcast scripted, cable scripted
or digital scripted shows.
71
FIGURE 4: Lead Actor Gender,
New Scripted Shows, 2017-18 Season (n=50)
Female
28%
Women claimed only 28 percent of the
leads for new scripted shows debuting Male
in the 2017-18 television season, a figure 72%
significantly smaller than those observed
during the 2015-16 season for broadcast
scripted, cable scripted or digital scripted
shows (35.7 percent, 44.8 percent, and 43.1
percent, respectively).
FIGURE 5: Minority Cast Share, by Share of New Scripted Shows, 2017-18 Season (n=50)
30%
25% 24% 24%
20%
16% 16%
15% Twenty-four percent of the new scripted
12% shows debuting during the 2017-18 season
had majority-minority casts, a figure
10% 8% significantly higher than the figures for the
broadcast, cable or digital arenas in 2015-16.
5%
0%
s
r
ve
les
20
30
40
50
do
or
to
to
to
to
an
%
%
11%
31%
10
21
41
%
50
72
CONCLUSION
Five Years of Progress?
With perhaps the most dramatic Best Picture reveal in the history of the event,
the 2017 Academy Awards telecast concluded as Moonlight edged the favored La
La Land. But this was only after the latter had been mistakenly announced as the
winner. The moment marked a monumental victory: Moonlight had just become
the first film with an all-Black cast and the first LGBT-themed film to win the
prestigious honor. The moment also represented the climax of an awards season in
which Hollywood — not exactly known for its inclusiveness, as #OscarsSoWhite17
recently underscored — made great strides toward including and celebrating
diverse talent. Indeed, Viola Davis became the first Black actor that year to achieve
the Triple Crown of Acting (Tony, Emmy, Oscar) after winning Best Actress in
a Supporting Role for her portrayal of Rose in Fences. Similarly, Donald Glover
was celebrated at the Emmy’s in 2017, becoming the first Black person to win
Outstanding Directing for a Comedy Series, while also winning Outstanding Lead
Actor in a Comedy Series, both for his hit FX television show, Atlanta.
An observer who did not know any better might read these developments as
confirmation that Hollywood had finally solved its longstanding diversity problem.
To be sure, findings from the Hollywood Diversity Report 2018 document progress
for women and people of color in a number of film and television arenas since 2014-
15, the period highlighted in the previous report in this series. The only key arenas
examined for which minorities did not post at least minimal year-to-year gains
relative to their White counterparts included broadcast scripted show creators
and the writers credited for digital scripted episodes. Meanwhile, though women
failed between reports to make any significant progress relative to men among film
directors, leads in broadcast scripted television shows, the creators of cable and
broadcast scripted shows, and the writers credited for television episodes, they did
post notable gains in several other arenas.
74
Missed Opportunities color reach proportionate representation among
the actors in film and television, but at least the
However, if we consider the five-year run of
trend lines for both groups point in the right
the report series — which examines films and
direction. Unfortunately, the industry has been
television shows released between 2011-12
much slower to accept the related truth that its
and 2015-16 — we see that the arenas in which
success in providing today’s (and tomorrow’s)
woman and people of color registered sustained
audiences with what they crave also hinges on
progress were more rare, primarily confined
the presence of diverse talent behind the camera
to digital scripted shows for female leads and
— in the director’s chair, in the writers’ room,
broadcast television for leads and show creators
and in executive suites. The resulting missed
of color. But much of the action for talent of color
opportunities, this report series has documented,
was limited to Blacks, who actually approached
are not good for Hollywood’s bottom line.
proportionate representation in a few arenas.
To the extent that there were positive trends for For example, film projects have become
either women or minorities in film, the advances increasingly reliant on foreign financing, talent,
were much less pronounced. In both film and and audiences for success. But in today’s globalized
television, women and minorities remained movie industry, there is a myth promoted by
notably underrepresented in every arena in 2016. Hollywood decision makers that foreign audiences
will automatically reject films centered around
Reports in this series have repeatedly found that
people of color. Indeed, the conventional “wisdom”
films and television shows with casts attuned to
in the film industry has been that “black films don’t
America’s diversity tend to register the highest
travel,” 18 and this notion has posed a longstanding
global box office figures and viewer ratings.
obstacle to advancing diversity in Hollywood,
The industry appears to have finally embraced
particularly among film leads and directors.
the idea that America’s increasingly diverse
audiences demand film and television content The business of film distribution can be quite
populated with characters whose experiences complex, and the decision to bring a particular
resonate with their own, who look like them, film to any given territory might rest as much
and with whom they can relate. There is still
a long way to go before women or people of
75
with foreign distributors as with domestic barriers to women’s entry into and mobility
studios. However, the major studios still wield within entertainment careers. The momentum
considerable influence in this process by creating of the Me Too movement inspired prominent
demand for U.S. films and film stars abroad. women in the entertainment industry to initiate
In fact, filmmakers and actors of color in the the Time’s Up movement, a comprehensive
U.S. have demanded for years that Hollywood agenda aimed at promoting equality and safety
studios become more proactive in using their in the workplace through legislative initiatives,
considerable marketing resources and power to changes in corporate policies and hiring
cultivate international demand for diverse U.S. practices, and legal support for men and women
films and talent.19 To be sure, we document in with workplace sexual harassment and assault
this report that 2016 films with the most diverse cases.
casts tended to be released in fewer international
Taken together, these movements offer both
markets than those with overwhelmingly White
symbolic and concrete solutions to Hollywood’s
casts. If successful films that also highlight
gender diversity problem. By reshaping
the experiences of people of color are being
common understandings of harassment, sexual
released in fewer international markets than
violence and workplace power dynamics,
less-successful films that are not very diverse,
they lay the groundwork for actionable
then it is likely Hollywood is leaving considerable
initiatives to redress gender-based inequalities.
revenue on the table. America’s diversity, after all,
Meanwhile, increasing women’s representation
maps onto dozens of lucrative markets around
in leadership and executive positions would
the globe.
help normalize enlightened sensitivities around
From #OscarsSoWhite to #Me Too20 and gender roles, facilitate the establishment of
#Time’s Up21 accountability frameworks, and neutralize
informal occupational norms that have worked
Hollywood’s enduring failure to correct the
to marginalize women in Hollywood. Increasing
gender disparities chronicled in this report
the representation of women in Hollywood’s
series has locked many women out of influential
executive suites would also address the most
roles and entrenched a patriarchal occupational
distressing gender diversity numbers presented
culture within the entertainment industry. But
in this report, and, ultimately, transform how
this year — as the previous two did for people
women are represented on the big and small
of color — marked a potential turning point for
screen.
women in Hollywood. Sparked by the public
revelation of rampant sexual misconduct and
the mistreatment of women in the workplace,
the Me Too movement also shed light on long-
entrenched gender biases and the structural
76
AUTHORS
Dr. Darnell Hunt is Dean of the Division of Social Michael Tran is a Graduate Student Researcher
Sciences at UCLA, and professor of sociology with the Institute for Research on Labor
and African American Studies at UCLA. Dr. Hunt and Employment at UCLA. In addition to his
has written extensively on race and media. participation in the Hollywood Diversity Report,
He is editor of Channeling Blackness: Studies he is conducting an investigation into the cultural
on Television and Race in America, (Oxford politics of independent filmmakers of color.
University Press, 2005), an anthology of classic He has previously earned Master’s degrees
and contemporary studies examining television in demographics and social analysis and in
access and images of race. He also is the lead sociology, and is currently working towards a PhD
author on the past four annual Hollywood in sociology.
Diversity Reports. Over the past 20 years, Dr.
Amberia Sargent is a doctoral candidate in
Hunt has contributed to numerous projects
sociology at UCLA. Sargent’s work examines the
addressing the issues of access and diversity
relationship between the body and workplace
in the entertainment industry, including work
inequality in three complementary case studies,
with the WGA, SAG, AFTRA, NAACP and U.S.
each centering on different spheres of the
Commission on Civil Rights.
comedy industry: stand-up comedy, acting,
Dr. Ana-Christina Ramón is Director of and television writing. Her research takes an
Research and Civic Engagement for the Division intersectional approach to unpack the ways
of Social Sciences at UCLA. Dr. Ramón is a women deploy various embodiment strategies to
social psychologist trained in quantitative and navigate the double binds they encounter in the
qualitative methods. For over a decade, she has workplace.
worked extensively on social justice issues related
Debanjan Roychoudhury is a Ph.D. student in
to equity and access in higher education and the
sociology at UCLA. His research focuses broadly
entertainment industry. She has co-authored the
on policing, race, and neighborhood change
past four annual Hollywood Diversity Reports.
in urban communities. His MA paper analyzes
Her past research has also focused on conflict
newspaper coverage of police violence over time
perceptions and racial and gender stereotypes.
with special attention to depictions of urban
She co-edited (with Dr. Darnell Hunt) Black Los
Black people after the acquittals of police officers
Angeles: American Dreams and Racial Realities
on trial for murder.
(New York University Press, 2010). On behalf of
California Social Science Researchers, she (with
Dr. Hunt) co-authored amicus briefs in support
of affirmative action which were submitted to
the U.S. Federal Court of Appeals and to the U.S.
Supreme Court.
77
APPENDIX
TABLE 1: Networks and digital platforms included in the study
A&E Discovery IFC Seriously.TV
A&E Digital Disney Indigenous Media Showtime
ABC Disney Jr. Instagram Spike TV
Above Average Disney XD Investigation Discovery Starz
ActingDead.com DIY Lifetime SundanceTV
Adult Swim E! Lifetime Movie Network Syfy
Amazon El Rey Logo Syndicated
AMC Ellen Digital Network LouisCK.net TBS
Animal Planet EPIX MíTu Time, Inc
AOL Esquire MTV TLC
Apple Facebook MTV2 TNT
Awesomeness TV FeeIn National Geographic Travel Channel
BBC America Food Network NBC truTV
BET Fox Netflix TVLand
Bravo Freeform Nickelodeon UP TV
Cartoon Network Fullscreen Media Nicktoons USA
CBS FunnyOrDie Oath Verizon
Channel 4 Fusion OWN VH1
Cinemax FX Oxygen Viceland
CMT FXX PBS Vimeo
CNN FYI Pivot WE tv
Comcast Game Show Network Playstation WGN America
Comedy Central Google Pop Yahoo!
Crackle Hallmark Channel Reelz YouTube
CW HBO Refinery 29
CW Seed HGTV Rooster Teeth
Destination America History Science
DirecTV Hulu Seeso
78
E N D N OT E S
1 These films included the top 200 theatrical released from 2016, 13 See: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/
ranked by global box office, minus foreign-language films. The_EU_in_the_world_-_population
2 The 2015-16 season is defined as television programming that 14 See: http://www.economywatch.com/economic-statistics/

originally aired between September 1, 2015 and August 31, 2016. economic-indicators/GDP_Share_of_World_Total_PPP/
3 Total numbers for the various analyses in this report may deviate 15 For these analyses, simple return on investment is computed as
from the overall total for the number of films or television shows follows: (Revenue – Budget)/Budget. That is, the higher the ratio,
considered due to focused analyses on a subset of the data (noted the higher the rate of return.
below) or missing values for some cases (e.g., many reality shows
do not identify a cast, directors, or writers). 16 For both tweets and unique Twitter authors, these figures are
based on a show’s average for the season.
4 Household ratings (HH) are defined as the percentage of the
universe of households tuned to a particular TV program during 17 A viral Twitter hashtag that was created by April Reign in 2015. It has
the average minute of the program. This includes incremental become a movement for change in the entertainment industry.
viewing to programs watched at the time of the telecast as well
as watched in DVR playback that occurs within 7 days of the 18 Hornaday, Ann. (2013). “At Cannes, challenging the notion that
original telecast. The HH ratings presented by race are based on black films ‘don’t travel’.” The Washington Post. https://www.
the race of the head of household, while 18-49 ratings are based washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/at-cannes-challenging-the-
on individual viewers. Social media ratings consist of tweets and notion-that-black-films-dont-travel/2013/05/14/5f43de96-b9b3-
unique authors, which are measures of relevant U.S. Twitter activity 11e2-b94c-b684dda07add_story.html?utm_term=.7f4b68548a42;
from three hours before through three hours after a broadcast, Anderson, Tre’vell. (2017). “Disproving the ‘black films don’t travel’
local time. “Tweets” are ascribed to a linear TV episode, while Hollywood myth.” Los Angeles Times. http://www.latimes.com/
“unique authors” refer to unique Twitter accounts that have sent at entertainment/movies/la-et-mn-black-movies-global-audience-
least one tweet ascribed to a specific TV episode. myth-20170324-story.html
5 Theatrical Market Statistics: 2016, Motion Picture Association of 19 Bielby, Denise D. and William T. Bielby. (2002). “Hollywood Dreams,
America. Harsh Realities: Writing for Film and Television.” Contexts, 4(1): 25.
6 For example, see https://www.nyfa.edu/student-resources/binge- 20 The phrase “Me Too” was created in 2006 by Tarana Burke, a social
viewing-and-the-television-renaissance/ activist and community organizer, as part of a grassroots campaign
to empower women of color who had been sexually abused and
7 According to the Los Angeles Times, a large share of television assaulted. It became a viral hashtag on Twitter in October 2017.
production has left the state for other locales, where incentives
offered to television producers enhance the bottom line (Watt, 21 Time’s Up is a major initiative created by over 300 women in the
August 28, 2013). entertainment industry in January 2018 to combat systemic sexual
harassment in Hollywood and in blue-collar industries nationwide
8 See “California Film Commission Tax Credit Program Progress For more information, see https://www.timesupnow.com/.
Report, September 2017,” http://filmcafirst.ca.gov/wp-content/
uploads/CA-Tax-Credit-Progress-Report-09-2017-FINAL.pdf.
9 “Lead role” is defined in this report as the first credited actor/

performer for a given project’s list of cast members.
10 See “2016 Hollywood Diversity Report: Busine$$ as Usual,” Ralph J.

Bunche Center for African American Studies, February 2016.
11 In the analyses for this section, a film or television show that

received an Oscar or Emmy in any category is counted as an “Oscar
winner” or “Emmy winner.” No distinction is made between films
or television shows that won a single or multiple awards.
12 In this chart (and others that consider the odds of winning an

Oscar or Emmy), the conditional probability of Event A (winning an
award) is computed, given that Event B (overall cast diversity) has
already occurred.
79
Design and layout by Design Action Collective

UCLA Hollywood Diversity Report 2018 2-27-18

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

UCLA Hollywood Diversity Report 2018 2-27-18

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Acknowledgements

Photo Credits: Rawpixel/Thinkstock (p. 20); Alex LMX/Shutterstock (p. 28);

Hollywood Diversity Report 2018....................................................................................6

The Data .........................................................................................................................7

Overall Cast Diversity....................................................................................................20

The Bottom Line............................................................................................................ 58

New Shows: 2017-18.......................................................................................................70

Five Years of Progress?.................................................................................................. 74

This is the fifth in a series of annual reports to examine relationships between

U.S. Population Shares, White and Minority, 1960-2050

Source: U.S. Census

The following highlights emerge from this year’s analysis:

1. Minorities. Constituting nearly 40 percent of the U. S. population in 2016,

4. Gatekeepers. Since the previous report, the

Hollywood Diversity Report 2018

The Division of Social Science’s larger Hollywood Advancement Project, from

Remaining Los Angeles’s share of broadcast scripted show

FIGURE 2: Share by Location, Cable Scripted Shows,

FIGURE 3: Share by Location, Digital Scripted Shows,

Los Angeles’s share of

FIGURE 5: Share by Location, Cable Reality and Other Shows,

FIGURE 1: Percentage Distribution of Top Films by Genre,

10% 9.2% 8.6%

Drama remained the largest genre for theatrical films in 2016,

FIGURE 3: Cable TV by Genre, 2015-16 Season (n=821)

FIGURE 4: Digital Platform TV by Genre, 2015-16 Season (n=241)

Reality The comedy genre increased its

FIGURE 1: Leads by Race, Top Theatrical Films, 2011 - 2016

Only 1.4 out of 10 lead actors in film are people of color

80% 74.4% 74.7% 74.2% Female

FIGURE 3: Leads by Race, Broadcast Scripted, 2011-12 to

FIGURE 4: Leads by Gender, Broadcast Scripted, 2011-12 to

48.5% Women’s share of broadcast

People of color accounted 100%

FIGURE 6: Leads by Gender, Cable Scripted, 2011-12 to

Women have closed the

FIGURE 7: Leads by Race, Digital Scripted Shows, 2013-14 to

Though people of color 100% 90.9% 88.9%

FIGURE 9: Lead Talent by Race, Broadcast Reality and Other

People of color nearly 100%

FIGURE 10: Lead Talent by Gender, Broadcast Reality and Other

Though people of color’s 100%

FIGURE 12: Lead Talent by Gender, Cable Reality and Other

The share of the top films with

FIGURE 2: Share of Film Roles, by Race, 2016 (n=1,352)

700 668 Male

FIGURE 4: Minority Cast Share, by Share of Broadcast Scripted Shows,

10% or less 11% to 20% 21% to 30%

FIGURE 6: Minority Cast Share, by Share of Digital Scripted Shows,

FIGURE 8: Share of Roles, by Gender, Broadcast Scripted Shows,

Whites’ share of cable scripted roles decreased

Women’s share of cable

FIGURE 12: Share of Roles, by Gender, Digital Scripted Shows,

Women’s share of digital

FIGURE 14: Actor Counts, by Race and Gender, Cable Scripted

FIGURE 15: Actor Counts, by Race and Gender, Digital Scripted

People of color and women, as previous reports in this

100% 89% 89.9%

Only 1.3 out of 10 film directors are people of color

FIGURE 2: Director Gender, Top Theatrical Films, 2011 - 2016

Less than 1 out of 10 film directors are female

For more than half of the broadcast scripted shows from

51% and over

For nearly two-thirds of the broadcast scripted shows from 31 to 40%