I found this article by CNN truly insightful. Compared to the many other Oscar analysis’ and opinions, this one gave a different perspective. This article gave a business aspect on the matter and how diverse films actually make a lot of money for the industry. The other articles talked about how and why it is such a big issue, simply over the lack of representation; this one covered the facts on how Hollywood, in general, is very diverse and how the problem really is with the Academy.
The headline was intriguing in itself reading, “Hollywood is more diverse than ever. So why are the Oscars still so white?”. I think this headline is immediately attractive because it narrows the problem down to the Academy, instead of people assuming representation is a major problem in the industry as a whole. There is a link provided under Chauncey Alcorns name, the author of the article, who writes various articles for CNN business. I was more inclined to read this article because of the hyperlink providing more background on him. It can be seen that he has covered other major stories making me trust him more since CNN has trusted him to write that many.
Out of all the Oscars articles I have read, I definitely learned the most from this one. They talked to various people in the business and not only provided their statements over this issue, but also provided actual data and research. Some notable ones being, research from the Annenberg program and the UCLA Hollywood Diversity Study. The video at the top of the article was also insightful. It briefly went over the Academy’s history, how significant campaigning for big films is and the money it takes to even be recognized for an award. The information in the video was given by New York Times reporter, Kyle Buchanan, who has covered a lot of Oscars content. It was great to hear this information from someone who has reported the subject for so long and was able to explain the trends.
Overall, I think the reporter and his sources are credible. His sources were mostly from CNN, which is not necessarily a bad thing; since they are not relying on outside sources, they are taking responsibility for their own organizations work. The few outside sources that were used, were from trusted news organizations such as, Business Insider, the New York Times, etc. I also appreciated how transparent the article was. Alcorns had stated that CNN and Warner Bros. are both owned by the same company when mentioning Warner Bros. Even though it was not entirely necessary, since it was just a minor mention, I still admired the openness.
There were also no signs of bias or personal opinions on the reporters part. Any personal comments came from the people that CNN business talked to. The interviewees were significant heads in the business who have years of experience and knowledge such as actors, producers, members from major studios, as well a member of the Academy. Although, I would have liked to see more comments from the Academy. Still, I would not say that CNN completely failed to cover the other side. In that I mean, that the reporter also mentioned the diverse films that have been nominated and won awards and also provided statistics on how there has been at least some improvement in representation.
I was pleased with everything that was covered, especially the data. The only exception that came to mind was when Alcorn mentioned there was only one person of color nominated -I would have liked it if he expanded on this. A big issue is not just the lack of diversity but also when minorities are acknowledged, it is mostly when they are portraying marginalized roles and rarely in roles of power. To give it a letter grade compared to the other articles I have read, I would give it an A, but to be fair, it is truly a B. I would not give it the full A due to the lack of say on the other side, maybe seeing some direct comments from Academy members would make it seem more neutral.
