Diverse Crews Are Not Just For Making "Diversity" Programmes

What does it mean to be a black producer?

How does a woman scriptwriter differ from a male script writer?

In what way does a disabled director work differently from an able bodied director?

I know these are all ridiculous questions which are impossible to answer. But ten years ago I was in a meeting at the BBC which was asking these very questions, only not about race, gender and disability specifically, but about programmes made in Scotland.

The BBC was trying to quantify what made Scottish films different from films made in London.

My understanding was the poor people who were tasked with such a ridiculous job were also going to Wales, N. Ireland and other parts of the UK to ask the same question.

The meeting came to a few conclusions:

1.       Scottish programmes are different from London productions because they are made in Scotland.

2.       There is no easy quantifiable difference. Living in Scotland gives people different perspectives, interests, and in some cases even different values, from living elsewhere in the UK. And so given editorial control this is organically reflected in the finished programme.

3.       Everyone in the meeting fought against Scottish programmes being pigeonholed that it is only genuinely “Scottish” if people are wearing kilts, eating haggis or playing the bagpipes.

I was reminded of this meeting a few days ago when I read about a new series of eight short films which the BBC will be broadcasting called “Soon Gone” looking at Caribbean family’s arrival in Britain on the HMS Windrush in 1948 and charting their progress over the last seventy years and into the future

Talking about the series Jonty Claypole, the head of BBC arts said; “It was implicit from the start we would have a black cast and crew. This seemed like something television could do to mark the Windrush era”.

I commend the BBC and the independent production company for seeking out diverse cast and crew to work on the production. I am sure the films have a different sensibility due to the how they were staffed.

However at the same time I disagree with Jonty Claypole that having a black cast and crew “seemed like something television could do to mark the Windrush era.”

What I would have liked to see to “mark the Windrush era” is for television to reflect how black people are now woven into the fabric of the UK and this would mean productions with majority black staff producing programmes that have nothing to do with explicitly black subject matter.

Whilst I was in Scotland I oversaw award winning news and current affairs programmes about drugs in sport, illegal puppy farming and the financial crisis – all issues that effected Scottish people but were not “explicitly” Scottish. These programmes were crewed by majority Scottish staff and I am 100 percent sure that they were qualitatively and quantitatively different from anything a London based team would have made.

Just like my colleagues in Scotland who did not want to only work on programmes with kilts and shortbread. Black directors, scriptwriters and crew equally want to make programmes that have nothing to do with the Windrush, Nelson Mandela and slavery. Given the opportunity I am also sure black teams would create award winning films on “non-black” subject matter that would have a completely different feel than if a non-diverse team produced them.

Therefore my Windrush plea to the all British broadcasters is: We are now part of British society so remember we can make programmes about everything, we are not just there when you have a black programme you want to make.

This year marks the 50^th anniversary of the first man on the moon. Let’s commission a series of short films about that – but crewed by a majority black team. That might be the best way to really honour the Windrush legacy and get a unique perspective on a subject which has been covered hundreds of times before. How about it Jonty?