The white Oscars

Leonardo DiCaprio wins his first Oscar Award in 2016

The United States is rapidly becoming a majority-minority nation. Yet, the composition of Oscars voters, and this year's Academy Awards nominees, is still overwhelmingly white. 

It's the world's most prestigious movie awards ceremony.

But controversy over racial discrimination overshadowed the Oscars in Hollywood on Sunday night.

No ethnic minority actor or actress was nominated for an award for the second year running, sparking a social media campaign hashtag #OscarsSoWhite.

Black comedian and actor Chris Rock, who was urged to boycott the ceremony, tackled the issue with a 10 minute opening monologue.

Speculating on why the furore over diversity in the industry had taken root this year, rather than in the 1950s or 1960s, Rock said black Americans had "real things to protest at the time".

"We were too busy being raped and lynched to care about who won best cinematography," he said. "When your grandmother's swinging from a tree, it's really hard to care about best documentary foreign short.

But a lack of diversity in the entertainment industry is not just a problem for the Oscars - a new report warns of an "inclusion crisis" for ethnic minorities, women and others in film and television.

On Inside Story, we examine if the Oscars are in fact whiter than white. Is the controversy being exaggerated?

For the second straight year, the Oscar nominees within the major categories are all white men or women. Not a single African or Asian American, Latina/o or Native American was nominated. 

Another Oscars' whitewash has spurred social media protests (#OscarsSoWhite),criticism from within Hollywood, and even a call for boycott demanding "more diversity". Demands for greater diversity within American cinema, whether within films themselves or award recognitions, are not new. They were launched five, 10 and 20 years ago. 

These demands for more diversity have rendered token progress. In years after protests, Halle Berry won the Best Actress in the Leading Role category in 2001, and in 2013, Lupita Nyang'o won the Best Actress in a Supporting Role in 2013 for 12 Years a Slave.

Yet, these moments of minority recognition are fleeting and far between. And almost always, followed by award whitewashes or near whitewashes. Illustrating that demands for mere or more diversity should be replaced, or recast, with calls demanding structural reform within the Academy itself.  

Oscar voters are old, wealthy, white, and men. Not unlike every other hall of US power, this narrow demographic controls which films are made, which actors are cast, and certainly, which films and actors deserve Oscar recognition.

Ninety-four percent of the Academy are white; 77 percent are men; African-Americans comprise roughly 2 percent of the Academy, while Latina/o voters are less than 2 percent. Other communities of colour, including Asian, Arab and Native Americans, are virtually non-existent within the Oscar voting committee.

Perhaps America's quintessential old boys' network, a virtually all-white Academy is the principal reason the 2016 Oscar nominations were once again swept by white men and women.

Not unlike an informally segregated golf course, or corporate boardroom, these gatekeepers not only determine - in the words of Martin Scorsese - who's "in the frame and what's out". But also, whose cinematic performances and contributions, creativity and impact, are awarded.

Moreover, the racial identity of the Academy illustrates why films centering on minority narratives - like Ryan Coogler's Creed or F Gary Gray's biopic, Straight Outta Compton - did not resonate with voters, and ultimately, were not nominated.

The latter film, depicting the story of the landmark rap group NWA was both critical and a box office hit. But the nearly all-black cast, featuring the rise, fall and impact of the controversial rap collective and its iconic members, likely clashed with the interests and sensibilities of Oscar voters.

One member of the Academy, a white male, stated, "I happen to think Straight Outta Compton is not a great film for reasons of structure and substance."

Perhaps fittingly, the-all white music industry that feared and didn't understand NWA nearly three decades ago mirrors the all-white Oscar voters who don't understand Straight Outta Compton today. History certainly repeats itself. But this time, within another segment of the entertainment industry also dominated by white, old, wealthy men.

The reoccurring demands for racial diversity should be redirected from the Oscar nominations and towards the Academy itself. Certainly, if the racial composition of Oscar voters remains almost entirely white and male, then the composition of the nominees will follow in that very line.

Though interrupted some years by nominations and awards to filmmakers or actors of colour, this shouldn't be perceived as emblematic of racial progress in Hollywood, but as intermittent deviations from the norm that are more superficial and strategic than symbolic of structural inclusion.

Meaningful racial diversity within the Academy itself should be reframed as the goal. Namely, integrating black and brown voters that can relate to the structure and feel the substance of Straight Outta Compton. And including gatekeepers of colour that represent the racial and multicultural evolution of the country, who will greenlight films and recognise performances that reflect the changing demographics within the country. 

In cinema, African American narratives are ghettoised within a separated "black films" industry. Latina/o American storylines are branded foreign and unmarketable, while this demographic ranks as the fastest growing population in the country.

Leonardo DiCaprio has finally won his first Oscar award, for his role in the revenge movie “The Revenant” as best actor in 2016.

This came 23 years after the actor was first nominated for the Oscars.

DiCaprio, 41, had been nominated four times previously for an acting Oscar over a career spanning 25 years. He was the favorite to clinch the Academy Award this year for his grueling portrayal of a fur trapper left for dead in an icy wilderness after being mauled by a bear.

In a fight for survival, his “Revenant” character Hugh Glass treks through snow-covered forests, gets swept away in a waterfall, sleeps inside the carcass of a disemboweled horse and hungrily eats raw bison liver before making it back to his camp.

DiCaprio, a bachelor with a string of supermodel girlfriends, has matured into one of the world’s most admired and popular actors, as well as a champion of environmental causes ranging from marine reserves to the rights of indigenous people.

In his acceptance speech, DiCaprio, who received a standing ovation, said: “Let us not take this planet for granted. I do not take tonight for granted.”

DiCaprio added: “Our production needed to move to the southern tip of this planet to find snow. Climate change is real, it is happening now. It is the most urgent threat facing our entire species and we need to work collectively together, and we need to support leaders around the world who do not speak for the big polluters and the big corporations but who speak for all of humanity.”

DiCaprio had already won Golden Globe and Screen Actors Guild trophies for the role, which transformed the heartthrob from movies like “Titanic” and “Romeo + Juliet” into a greasy-haired 1820s fur trapper who barely speaks after the bear ripped his throat.

DiCaprio won his first Oscar nomination in 1994 for his supporting role as a mentally challenged boy in “What’s Eating Gilbert Grape.”

His romantic “Romeo + Juliet” and “Titanic” roles went unrecognized by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, and it was another 10 years before his obsessive-compulsive Howard Hughes in “The Aviator” brought a second Oscar nomination.

Nominations for 2006’s “Blood Diamond” and 2013’s “The Wolf of Wall Street” came and went without DiCaprio taking home the most coveted trophy in show business.

List of Oscar Nominations received by Leonardo DiCaprio:
1993 What’s Eating Gilbert Grape – Best Supporting Actor – Nominated
2005 The Aviator – Best Actor – Nominated
2007 Blood Diamond – Best Actor – Nominated
2014 The Wolf of Wall Street – Best Actor  – Nominated
2014 The Wolf of Wall Street – Best Picture (as producer) – Nominated
2016 The Revenant – Best Actor – Won

And Muslim depictions in cinema virtually limited to terrorist villains and national security threats, intensifying the hateful political rhetoric and on-the-ground Islamophobia gripping the country. A brand of bigoted diversity, as illustrated by the six Oscar nominations American Sniper received last year, Oscar voters are more than keen to celebrate.

To put things into perspective, American Sniper - a film lionising a soldier indiscriminately gunning down Iraqis - received six more nominations than actors or filmmakers combined both in 2015 and 2016. And one more Oscar award.

A film depicting the brutal execution of minorities is more deserving of Oscar recognition than films humanising minorities. This message, unlike the structure and substance of Straight Outta Compton, resonated resoundingly with Oscar voters.

Films are far more than films. They, perhaps more than another medium, are the salient shapers of views on politics and culture, beauty and identity. Particularly American cinema, consumed by viewers in every country in the world, and emulated by film industries near and far. 

Apart from exporting the most recent blockbuster or action hit, Hollywood also exports the prevailing face of racism, colourism, and the underlying messages and patent images that whiteness is the benchmark. While the casting out of black and brown bodies reaffirms deeply rooted racial castes that brand these groups inferior.

Calls for mere or more diversity in Oscar nominations will not change the natural trajectory of white supremacy within Hollywood. Demands for structural instead of token diversity - followed by meaningful reform - will.

Donald Trump in trouble as he refuses to condemn KKK endorsement

Donald Trump initially refused to condemn comments made by former Ku Klux Klan grand wizard David Duke, who told listeners of his radio show that voting against the Republican frontrunner would be the equivalent of “treason to your heritage.”

“Just so you understand, I don’t know anything about David Duke,” Trump told Jake Tapper on CNN’s “State of the Union” Sunday. “I don’t know anything about what you’re even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists. So, I don’t know — did he endorse me, or what’s going on? You know, I know nothing about David Duke, I know nothing about white supremacists. And so when you’re asking me a question I’m supposed to be talking about people I know nothing about.”

The Anti-Defamation League had called on the real estate mogul to disavow the support from Duke and other white supremacist groups. But Trump refused to repudiate them.

“I have to look at the group. I mean, I don’t know what group you’re talking about,” Trump said. “You wouldn’t want me to condemn a group that I know nothing about. I’d have to look. If you would send me a list of the groups, I will do research on them and certainly I would disavow if I thought there was something wrong. But you may have groups in there that are totally fine — it would be very unfair. So give me a list of the groups and I’ll let you know.”

“I’m just talking about David Duke and the Ku Klux Klan here,” Tapper said.

“Honestly, I don’t know David Duke,” Trump replied. “I don’t believe I’ve ever met him. I’m pretty sure I didn’t meet him. And I just don’t know anything about him.”

But on Friday at a press conference announcing he had the endorsement of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Trump didn’t sound like he didn’t know anything about Duke. 

“I didn’t even know he endorsed me,” Trump said when he was asked about Duke’s public support. “David Duke endorsed me? OK. I disavow, OK?”

“Voting against Donald Trump at this point is really treason to your heritage,” Duke said on his radio show Thursday. “I’m not saying I endorse everything about Trump, in fact I haven’t formally endorsed him. But I do support his candidacy, and I support voting for him as a strategic action. I hope he does everything we hope he will do.”

In 2000, Trump, who had flirted with the idea of a third-party run with the Reform Party’s presidential nomination, called Duke “a Klansman” and Pat Buchanan a “neo-Nazi.”

“This is not company I wish to keep,” Trump said in statement that was recently surfaced by BuzzFeed.

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz called Trump’s refusal to disavow Duke on Sunday “sad.”

Florida Sen. Marco Rubio said it makes Trump “unelectable.”

“We cannot be a party that nominates someone who refuses to condemn white supremacists and the Ku Klux Klan,” Rubio said at a rally in Virginia Sunday. “Not only is that wrong, it makes him unelectable. How are we going to grow our party with a nominee that refuses to condemn the Ku Klux Klan? Don’t tell me he doesn’t know who the Ku Klux Klan is. This is serious.”

Trump subsequently tweeted his disavowment.

Last week, South Carolina Conservative Action Council, a group dedicated to “defense of the proudly Confederate South,” rallied at the State House in support of Trump’s bid for the Republican presidential nomination.

His campaign did not respond to multiple requests for comment from Yahoo News asking whether it accepts the SCCAC’s endorsement and why such groups are drawn to Trump.

With Yahoo News

How Hillary Clinton won black vote

Hillary Clinton began her campaign to win South Carolina years ago.

African-American voters carried Clinton to an overwhelming victory over Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, in the state’s Democratic presidential primary. African-Americans typically make up the majority of South Carolina’s Democratic electorate and, according to CNN’s exit polling, Clinton won with the support of 84 percent of the state’s black community.

Her husband, Bill Clinton, was famously dubbed America’s “first black president” because of his background, behavior and the admiration he earned from some in the African-American community during his time in office. But fond memories of Bill and the 1990s aren’t what cemented Hillary Clinton’s edge with black voters in South Carolina. Clinton managed to build a base in the Palmetto State through a years-long, under-the-radar operation to stay in touch and gather support from African-American leaders in the state she lost to Barack Obama in 2008.

Sanders, on the other hand, struggled to gain traction with black voters in South Carolina, hampered by the very thing that has lifted him elsewhere: his position as an outsider and newcomer on the state’s political scene. Attempts at outreach came late and were described by some local African-American leaders as ham-fisted.

The Clinton campaign’s South Carolina ground operation launched on the day she announced her presidential bid last April. At the time, she was the clear frontrunner and had the fundraising to match. That early edge let Clinton hire experienced local staff and set up shop in South Carolina, long before Sanders was seen as anything more than a long-shot challenger with little national profile.

“We were in this state first. The day we launched this campaign, we had staff in the state,” said Marlon Marshall, Clinton’s director of states and political engagement.

But Clinton’s presence in South Carolina began long before that day. Bill Clinton won the Palmetto State primaries in 1992 and 1996, which allowed Hillary Clinton to build relationships in the state and get to know its politics and leading personages. In fact, Clinton’s ties in the state predate her husband’s presidential bid. Clay Middleton, a native South Carolinian who served as state director of Clinton’s campaign, noted she first came into the state during the 1970s, while working as a young lawyer with the Children’s Defense Fund. And as first lady of Arkansas, Clinton co-chaired a task force on infant mortality with former South Carolina Gov. Richard Riley.

“She’s been working in and with South Carolinians since the ’70s, but every decade since then, she’s been in and out of the state working with people,” Middleton said. “She has deep roots here, and it has blossomed over the years.”

But all that support seemingly vanished in 2008, when Clinton faced off against Obama, the first African-American major-party presidential primary frontrunner. Rev. Joseph Darby, vice president of the Charleston branch of the NAACP, attributed Clinton’s loss that year to the simple fact that voters had — and wanted to take — the chance to elect the first black president.

“Before that possibility came, Hillary was actually doing quite well,” Darby explained. “She had nailed down a good number of endorsements.”

Nevertheless, even after being beaten by Obama in South Carolina, Clinton never retreated from South Carolina, Darby said.

“I don’t think Hillary’s ever been off the ground except for the little while when there was a tiff after the ’08 primary. She has stayed in touch with the community. She started laying groundwork for this run, oh, probably three or four years ago. She’s had people circulating. … She’s talked to the right folks,” Darby said, adding, “I don’t think South Carolina ever entirely left the Clintons. It might have parked them in the corner for one election, but they’ve maintained good relationships.”

In contrast, a source said the Sanders campaign did not begin to establish a large presence in the state until last September.

See What Rio Ferdinand Did Said That shocked BT Sport viewers

Rio Ferdinand suggests Zinedine Zidane was not a truly great player.

Rio Ferdinand raised a few eyebrows on Wednesday night after claiming that Zinedine Zidane, the great former France international, would not make it into his top five or 10 all-time great players list.

And the ex-Manchester United star, who now works as a pundit on BT Sport, even suggested that - in his mind - Zidane was perhaps not a “top, top player”.

Ferdinand argued the truly great players were more explosive and that the graceful Zidane, although beautiful to watch, was less effective.

“Rio, you’re not overly convinced - you don’t put him in your top five or 10 players?” Gary Lineker asked Ferdinand before Real Madrid’s 2-0 win over AS Roma in the Champions League last-16 first leg.

“No, I don’t,” the retired defender replied. “There’s no denying he was a magician, an unbelievable footballer, but when I think of the top, top players - the likes of Ronaldinho, Diego Maradona, Cristiano Ronaldo, the real Ronaldo ‘R9’, Messi - these guys for me are more explosive and they got me off my seat a lot more than what Zidane did.

Zinedine Zidane is already losing patience with a player

Zinedine Zidane is already losing patience with James Rodriguez.

Zinedine Zidane has only been in charge of Real Madrid for 10 days but he already has a problem with one member of his first-team squad.

The French coach, according to Catalan newspaper Sport, doesn’t even want to look at a painting of James Rodriguez because he’s fed up with the Colombia international’s attitude.

Zidane is frustrated that James is above his ideal weight and doesn’t seem to be focused - even on the training ground - and is beginning to worry that he might be fighting a losing battle with the technically-gifted playmaker.

Sport speculate that James’s love of the Madrid nightlife, fast cars and a luxurious lifestyle is affecting his performances.

Earlier this month he was involved in a 200mph ‘high-speed pursuit’ - per the Mirror - with an undercover police officer while he was on his way to training.