However, it is precisely that lack of diversity that hinders and limits the voters as an aggregate to make the best decisions regarding what projects are (subjectively) the best. An illustration of why such diversity is needed is seen in the case of the British blogger and writer, Nikesh Shukla. After writing a short story, Shukla received a mixed critique from a literary blog reviewer who proclaimed to have enjoyed the story but criticized him for using South Asian characters, saying the story was ultimately an “amorphous mess of Indian names” but surprisingly filled with “universal experiences” so as to imply minorities only experience the world through an ethnic lens (Santhanam et. al, 2015). This sort of implicit bias is not based in malice, but rather lack of experience and understanding. The literary reviewer has undoubtedly grown up and lives with a clear expectation of his/her literary consumption; it is almost certainly the expectation that the characters, themes, and tropes of the literature are all relatable to him/her. When it is not, there is perhaps a lack of interest or even disappointment. Surely, it is possible some of the Oscar voters have the same or similar level of bias as Shukla’s reviewer and therefore gravitate towards content they feel more comfortable and familiar with. This preference for familiarity is likely a significant cause as to why not only do films and other content with disparate racial and ethnic components do poorly among a virtually homogenous audience such as the Oscar voters, but also why content creators tend to replace those racial and ethnic components with more recognizable and socially acceptable ones. A conspicuous instance of such replacement is the trend of casting white actors in roles usually written for non-white actors:
However, it is precisely that lack of diversity that hinders and limits the voters as an aggregate to make the best decisions regarding what projects are (subjectively) the best. An illustration of why such diversity is needed is seen in the case of the British blogger and writer, Nikesh Shukla. After writing a short story, Shukla received a mixed critique from a literary blog reviewer who proclaimed to have enjoyed the story but criticized him for using South Asian characters, saying the story was ultimately an “amorphous mess of Indian names” but surprisingly filled with “universal experiences” so as to imply minorities only experience the world through an ethnic lens (Santhanam et. al, 2015). This sort of implicit bias is not based in malice, but rather lack of experience and understanding. The literary reviewer has undoubtedly grown up and lives with a clear expectation of his/her literary consumption; it is almost certainly the expectation that the characters, themes, and tropes of the literature are all relatable to him/her. When it is not, there is perhaps a lack of interest or even disappointment. Surely, it is possible some of the Oscar voters have the same or similar level of bias as Shukla’s reviewer and therefore gravitate towards content they feel more comfortable and familiar with. This preference for familiarity is likely a significant cause as to why not only do films and other content with disparate racial and ethnic components do poorly among a virtually homogenous audience such as the Oscar voters, but also why content creators tend to replace those racial and ethnic components with more recognizable and socially acceptable ones. A conspicuous instance of such replacement is the trend of casting white actors in roles usually written for non-white actors: