Black On White TV
Monday, 24 June 2024
Minority Report - How journalism's lack of diversity is failing our democracy
I rarely quote Enoch Powell favourably but I am reminded of one of his more famous, and less divisive, quotations: ‘For a politician to complain about the press is like a ship’s captain complaining about the sea’ (3 December 1984, The Guardian).
All plain sailing?
Politicians need to navigate the sea they find themselves in, not the one they wish they were sailing in, and that political sea is very white. This may lead voters from ethnic minority backgrounds feeling disenfranchised, even if there are politicians of colour to vote for, because what they are discussing is determined by the almost exclusively white broadcast news editors, and disproportionately white newspaper journalists.
The news controllers are all white
There is not a single major television news bulletin, from the BBC’s Breakfast, News at One, News at Six, or News at Ten to Channel 4 News, to any of ITV’s major bulletins that is headed by a person of colour. I am not talking about in front of the camera, but about those with ultimate editorial control. There is also not a major television political current affairs which is headed by a person of colour. Again, I am not talking about in front of the camera but behind the camera with ultimate editorial control. The one possible exception is Debbie Ramsey, a black woman, who was appointed Editor of Channel 5 News in July 2023.
In 2020 UK Press Gazette published research by Women in Journalism, showing that in one week in July 2020 — at the height of the Black Lives Matter protests across the world — the UK’s 11 biggest newspapers failed to feature a single byline by a black journalist on their front pages. Taking non-white journalists as a whole, of the 174 bylines examined only four were credited to journalists of colour.
It should be noted that the week the study surveyed featured front-page stories about Black Lives Matter, the replacement of the toppled statue of the slave trader Edward Colston in Bristol, and the Court of Appeal ruling that the Muslim mother, Shamima Begum, should be allowed to return to the UK to fight the decision to remove her British citizenship.
Facts are sacred
As we think about the role journalism plays in our politics, and how elections are covered, it is important to keep this in mind. It would be churlish to say our news agenda is disproportionately determined by a racially non-diverse group of people. It would be more accurate to state the facts: despite the latest census in 2021 showing that England and Wales is approximately a fifth non-white, white people seem to decide our news agenda.
Away from the news
We should also remember that journalism is not the only medium of communication that shapes political discourse. Journalists first revealed the UK Post Office Horizon scandal way back in 2009, in Computer Weekly, with the story and developments being covered in the national press and broadcast news programmes. But it wasn’t until it was made into an ITV drama — Mr Bates vs the Post Office, shown in January 2024 — that it really gained political traction.
Drama, and other non-news genres, are able to bring issues to the political foreground that news and current affairs often simply fail to achieve. And again when you look at the demographics of the people responsible for our British domestic drama we see a startling lack of diversity.
If you look at film and TV in the UK, women make up only 13.6 per cent of working film directors. Things do not get much better for Black and Asian people when you delve into the statistics. Non-white people make up 14 per cent of England and Wales but just 2.2 per cent of TV directors.
And when it comes to disability, things get even worse. Despite the fact that 14 per cent of people in employment aged 16-64 consider themselves disabled, according to the Creative Skillset employment census, only 0.3 per cent of the total film workforce are disabled.
Accurate statistics for the demographics of people in senior positions of editorial responsibility in British broadcasting are thin on the ground but, anecdotally as a person who regularly attends industry events where people in these roles congregate, I regularly find myself able to count the number of non-white attendees on one hand, and the same applies for people with a visible disability.
Democratic denial?
The result of all of this means that the 2024 general election saw a massive irony and contradiction. For the first time in history we had a Prime Minister of colour defending his position, along with more senior politicians of colour than ever before — across the political divide — campaigning, while at the same time the democratic deficit in terms of our media was as bad as it has ever been.
Inevitable?
At this point I want to address what I assume some readers might be thinking: all this talk about the lack of racial diversity and democratic deficit is typical ‘woke madness’. If you are thinking this I have one word for you — Scotland.
It has long been recognised that an English press, based in London, is not able to cover the concerns and reflect the priorities and values of the people of Scotland. It is why newspapers such as The Herald and The Scotsman are such important mainstays in Scottish civic society and political discourse.
I was the head of BBC Scotland Current Affairs from 2007 to 2015. In 2014, ahead of the Scottish independence referendum, it became apparent that the BBC’s flagship nightly political news programme, Newsnight, was unable to cover the issues that Scottish people felt were relevant to them, as they were reported through an English prism. That realisation led to the launch of Scotland 2014 replacing Newsnight north of the border, bringing relevance to the Scottish audience rather than answering to an English-determined agenda.
One size definitely does not fit all
When it comes to racial diversity, this can mean that issues that are important to Black British and Asian people are simply not raised. From reparations for slavery to the return of the Koh-i-Noor diamond to India, there are numerous issues which have proven to be significant to these communities, but few politicians or journalists think any of these topics will be talked about in election coverage.
The inability of the disproportionately white media to address the concerns of people of colour has real consequences for our democracy and possibly the result of who is the next prime minister.
For example, Maria Sobolewska and Andrew Barlcay’s 2021 report ‘The Democratic Participation of Ethnic Minority and Immigrant Voters in the UK’ stated that while 11 per cent of white British people in the UK are not registered to vote, the figure rises to 14 per cent for people of Indian heritage, and 25 per cent for Black African minorities. Research by the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR), a centre-left thinktank, shows that voter turnout between white and non-white voters in previous elections has differed by 13 percentage points.
In a seminal 2019 paper by Silvia Galandini and Edward Fieldhouse (‘Discussants that mobilise: Ethnicity, political discussion networks and voter turnout in Britain’) the authors show the correlation between the form and shape of political discussions and voter turnout.
Britain needs a media that represents the different demographics that make up this great nation or we will end up with elections based on discussions over which politicians and political parties can best address the concerns of the white electorate.
There are issues that affect everyone but my time working as a journalist in Scotland taught me that sections of the electorate also want to talk about issues that are specific to them. Even issues that cut across demographics need to be framed in ways which are sensitive and cognisant of the needs to different demographics. If we do not achieve that, those sections of the electorate will fall out of the democratic process.
One final thought
In 2008 I was fortunate enough to attend a journalism conference where Professor Sarita Malik, who specialises in researching media, inequality, and representation, gave a keynote speech about the effects of platforming far-right wing parties. She said she found a very limited correlation between election results and the amount of airtime the far-right groups received.
However, there was a far closer correlation between the issues the media covered, and thought were important, and the election results. If issues such as illegal immigration or welfare cheating, which are traditionally issues raised by the far right, are prioritised in media coverage the far-right parties are far more likely to do well, almost irrespective of how much airtime they are given.
Politicians shouldn’t complain about the media, but there is no doubt some journalistic agendas favour some politicians and political engagement more than others.
This essay was first published in "General Election 2024: The Media and the Messengers" edited by Mr John Mair, Mr John Ryley, and Mr Andrew Beck. and available to buy now
Monday, 19 February 2024
The diversity iceberg of award shows
(An extract from the book “Access All Areas - the diversity manifesto for TV and beyond” by Lenny Henry and Marcus Ryder)
Now, before we get too carried away about the BAFTAs, I just want to clear up one common misconception. This is not a story about how I want more disabled, Black and working-class luvvies receiving awards and handing them out to each other. This was not an #OscarsSoWhite moment – the hashtag launched in 2015 to try to get more people of colour receiving awards. I’m not saying it is a bad campaign, but it is not what has driven me to fight for more diversity – I can’t stand the word ‘diversity’, by the way. More on that later.
This wasn’t about the glamorous winners. After all, every few years you do see a few more non-white winners, such as in the BAFTA 2020 Television Awards which saw a few more Black and Asian people pick up gongs. This looked great but industry insiders know that just two weeks earlier not a single Black or Asian person won a BAFTA Craft Award – the awards given to the directors, writers and people who make the programmes.
Awards ceremonies cast a light on the industry they celebrate. Whether they’re for the television or film industries or an evening recognising the double-glazing or plumbing industry. Here is the secret that no one tells you: if you want to know who really controls the industry, take your eyes off the stage.
The stage where the awards are given out to the handful of winning nominees is merely the tip of the iceberg. The other 90 per cent of that iceberg is sat on the tables around the stage. The power-brokers who control the industry, in this case the film industry, are literally and metaphorically in the shadows. Not in some sinister cat-stroking, secret lair in the Bermuda Triangle, James Bond villain kind of way. More in the boring civil servant type of way. The studio heads, executives and media regulators are all there at the awards ceremonies. Unlike the nominees, they are there year after year – they are people that control the industry.
Viewers might focus on the glittering celebrities who receive and then go home with the ugly-ass gongs, but if you want to change the industry, you can’t do it by concentrating on the 10 per cent above the water in the spotlight. You do it by looking at the 90 per cent below the surface who never even leave their seats.
My pun-tastic effort did not start me on a journey to change the glossy people we see on our television screens. It set me on a quest to change the people who control the industry. That is a journey I think we can all relate to, whatever our line of work.
It is not just BAFTA and the film and television industry that has a problem. In the UK less than 7 per cent of police officers are non-white. Less than 10 per cent of British teachers are people of colour, and that drops to less than 5 per cent for head teachers. There are just six female chief executives of companies in the FTSE 100. When it comes to the country’s top judges, almost two-thirds – 65 per cent – went to private school, despite the fact that only 7 per cent of the population receive a private education.
We live in a society that excludes far too many people, from far too many walks of life. It is time we focus on just one aspect of Joaquin Phoenix’s speech when he said we must ‘dismantle’ the system, and ensure everyone can access all areas of power throughout society.
The question is: how?
It is a question I have been trying to answer for the last seven years. I want to share some of that journey with you and some of the lessons I have learnt along the way. It might have all started with a terrible pun but this is no joking matter.
(For the record, there are some very good puns on the circuit. Masai Graham, a pun fu master, won the National Pun Championships with this: ‘I’m a 35-year-old mixed race guy from West Bromwich, so I’ve got a reputation to uphold. So it’s difficult for me to write jokes about flowers, without the stigma attached . . .’ Thank you, good night! Please tip your waitresses on your way out.)
Tuesday, 1 August 2023
The Great Media Diversity Executive Exodus
Earlier this month, it was revealed the BBC’s Head of Creative Diversity, Joanna Abeyie, was leaving the corporation, although for many people working in the area of media diversity her departure had been an open secret for a few weeks prior.
The news followed the announcements just weeks earlier that four high level diversity and inclusion executives at major US media companies — Warner Bros. Discovery, Disney, Netflix and the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences — would be leaving their respective positions.
I am reminded of Oscar Wilde’s famous words on parental loss: “To lose one parent may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose both looks like carelessness.” It is a bold man who tries to improve on an Oscar Wilde quote but in this case I would add, “…to lose your aunts and uncles at the same time would suggest a murderer in the family.”
So what is happening in the world of media diversity? Is it just an ‘unfortunate’ coincidence, have media companies been ‘careless’ in their approach to diversity and inclusion, or is there a ‘serial killer’ stalking these diversity executives?
The headlines following the high profile departures in the US would suggest that many people are worried that it is the third option, with companies not only killing off these positions but reneging on diversity and anti-racism initiatives that were launched in the wake on the murder of George Floyd.
The Financial Times led with ‘Exits of diversity executives shake faith in US companies’ commitments,’ while the LA Times went with the headline ‘High-profile exits spark fears that Hollywood diversity pledges are just ‘PR’.’
However, when it comes to the UK, and the BBC in particular, I would suggest that there is a fourth option that is taking place, which requires us to look back further than just the past few weeks and even before the global Black Lives Matter protests.
To extend the Oscar Wilde quote to possible breaking point, “Other families look more appealing.”
Since 2019 the BBC has seen the departure of at least seven senior diversity and inclusion executives including; Tunde Ogungbesan (Head of Diversity, Inclusion and Succession), Anne Foster (Head of Workforce Diversity), Miranda Wayland (Deputy Head of Diversity), June Sarpong (Director of Creative Diversity), Jackie Christie (Race Lead on BBC Human Resources), Nina Goswami (Creative Diversity Lead) and, most recently, Abeyie. Interestingly, the vast majority of them have either left the large broadcasters or gone to work for non-media organisations ranging from Clifford Chance to Saudi Aramco.
On top of that, the BBC’s diversity department has been restructured at least three times since 2016, with nearly all the current key positions being external appointments with little or no previous media experience.
“Less Than Amazing” Results
Unsurprisingly with such a high staff turnover, constant restructuring, and a lack of industry knowledge and institutional memory, the results have been underwhelming.
If one looks at the UK national census for England and Wales ethnic diversity in the general population from 2011-2021, it has increased 4.9% (from 14.1% to 19%). At the same time, the BBC has increased the ethnic diversity of its workforce by 4.1% percentage points (from 12.3% to 16.6%). Despite all the money that the BBC has put into various diversity initiatives and policies, its non-white workforce diversity has grown at a slower rate than the population as a whole.
Or in other words: In relative terms, ethnic diversity at the BBC has gone backwards and, all things being equal, there is a strong argument that it would have been better not to have even had a diversity department. And while I have focused on the BBC — primarily because is is incredibly open about its data and job positions — anecdotally other UK broadcasters suffer from similarly high turnovers and “less than amazing” results.
Now, I am not advocating that the BBC, or any other British broadcaster, should get rid of their diversity departments. What this points to is a failure in how UK media approaches diversity.
The BBC, and other British broadcasters, must acknowledge that their approach to diversity is not working. The first step in achieving that is retaining the people who have first-hand experience of dealing with the problem. Joanna is simply the latest in a long line of diversity departures.
Tuesday, 25 July 2023
Generative AI Diversity Guidelines for Journalists
Examples of Possible Generative AI bias
ChatGPT did not name a single actor of colour
2. On the 13 June 2023 when prompted: “What are the important events in the life of Winston Churchill?”
Bing failed to mention his controversial views on race, his controversial role in the Bengal famine, and his controversial views towards the Jews or Islam.
3. On the 10 June 2023 when prompted: “What are important facts about the American founding fathers?”
Chat GPT failed to mention that any of them owned slaves.
We are not dictating, or even suggesting, that journalists should include these facts when covering these three issues. However it seems to clearly point to a certain perspective that traditionally would be thought does not represent the concerns and priorities of disproportionately historically marginalised groups.
Monday, 24 July 2023
How the Windrush Generation Shaped Modern Britain
should also be a time for reflection and building.
(This essay was first published in Evening Standard on 22nd June 2023)
Friday, 21 July 2023
Not Holding Power to Account - The Consequence of the Lack of Media Diversity
Tuesday, 30 May 2023
Disney’s The Little Mermaid, Caribbean Slavery, and Telling the Truth to Children
Children’s films should not ignore the more difficult parts of our history, just because adults feel uncomfortable addressing them.
The question is: How do we make films for children of all races that acknowledge the horrors of historical events such as slavery, while making sure they are free to imagine a wonderful world unencumbered by racism and are not defined by it?
On Sunday I watched the new live action version of Disney’s The Little Mermaid with my six-year-old son.
The visual effects are stunning and the casting is brilliant. If you are not aware, and at this point you would literally have to be living under a rock in the middle of the ocean not to be aware, Halle Bailey plays the eponymous heroine in a celebration of normalising Black beauty standards for children.
For my young son to see the most beautiful character in a film as a Black woman (with non-straightened hair) is important to me as a parent and goes against literally centuries of White beauty standards and societal norms. It is anti-racism at work on a deep level.
However there is one jarring massive problem with the film and it is less about its treatment of contemporary racial issues and more about its treatment of historical transatlantic slavery.
The film is set in the Caribbean in the 18th century. It does not specify exactly when, but judging from the ships, clothes and other references it is during a time of African chattel slavery. And yet there is not a single direct reference to slavery and the islanders live in racial harmony.
In this setting, I do not think we do our children any favours by pretending that slavery didn’t exist. For me Disney’s preference to try and wish the inconvenient truth away says more about the adult creatives than it does about children’s ability to work through it.
The enslavement of Africans in the Americas (across the southern states of the US, Caribbean and South America) in the 18th century was a brutal time and has been described by some historians and commentators as a “holocaust”, a crime against humanity that is so heinous that there are calls to this day for reparations to compensate the descendants of the victims.
Setting the fantastical story in this time and place is literally the equivalent of setting a love story between Jew and Gentile in 1940 Germany and ignoring the Jewish holocaust. Or possibly more accurately setting it in a slave plantation in America’s antebellum south and pretending the enslaved Africans were happy.
The 18th century Caribbean is a problematic time to set any children’s story, but that should make it full of creative possibilities as opposed to encouraging historical amnesia.
First of all, I do not need every story and movie that my 6-year-old consumes to be historically accurate. The appearance of steel pans in the film, an instrument invented in the late 1930s, raised a wry smile in the pedant in me, but I found it easy enough to overlook. But the total erasure and rewriting of one of the most painful and important parts of African diasporic history, is borderline dangerous, especially when it is consumed unquestioningly by children. I do not want my child to think that the Caribbean in the 18th century was a time of racial harmony, any more than I suspect a Jewish father wants his child to think 1940 Germany was a time of religious tolerance, however much we might both wish they were.
So does this mean Black children cannot have escapist fantasies of the past, or all our historical stories have to overtly address racism and slavery?
Definitely not.
I want my Black son to be as free, joyful and unencumbered by horrors of history just as much as any of his White and Asian friends at school, but I also do not want him, (or any children) to be given a false view of history on key issues - slavery being one of them.
There are several ways in which Disney could have easily set The Little Mermaid story in the Caribbean in the 18th century and not whitewashed (excuse the pun) the importance of history.
For example they could have set the story in Haiti post-1804. Haiti was the first Caribbean country to throw off the shackles of slavery and most importantly in its constitution of 1805 explicitly denounces the idea of different “races” proclaiming true equality. According to Julia Gaffield, a professor of history at Georgia State University, the constitution even “explicitly acknowledged that some ‘white women,’ Germans, and Poles had been naturalized as Haitian citizens highlighting the radical reconceptualization of race that underpinned Haiti’s entry on the world stage.”
In this scenario the Little Mermaid could have easily found her prince, while race and slavery could have been gently touched upon without being overbearing or having to show the horrors. A post revolutionary Haiti would have been the perfect setting for an island of racial harmony, and in doing so it would have gently educated children about an important period in world history.
When we think creatively and know our Caribbean history there are numerous solutions to setting the story in the Caribbean during the time of slavery while neither wanting to erase our history or expose children to the full horrors of chattel slavery. As someone of Jamaican heritage I would have loved the Little Mermaid to fall in love with a Maroon (a runaway slave), although that would have required her to swim a little upstream towards the island's interior.
We owe it to our children to give them the most amazing fantastical stories possible to help their imaginations grow. We do not do this by “whitewashing” out the difficult parts of our history. We do it by embracing our rich history and empowering them with the truth. Next time I hope Disney can be as adventurous with its story telling as it was with its casting.