DEI Is Disappearing In Hollywood. Was It Ever Really Here?

by

If the response from Hollywood to Donald Trump’s early days in the White House in 2017 was one of resistance, the reaction seems somewhat quieter and less engaged for the equivalent period in 2025.

Eight years ago, at the Academy Awards, there was a strong emphasis on promoting diversity, coinciding with Trump’s “America First” agenda, which placed actors and other artists squarely in the middle of cultural disputes. Warren Beatty touched upon politics during his presentation of the best picture nominees, noting that these films, with Barry Jenkins’ Moonlight eventually being crowned as the victor, represented the growing diversity within our society and our global admiration for diversity and freedom.

Eight years ago at the Oscars, there was a focus on promoting diversity during Trump’s “America First” time, when artists became central to cultural conflicts. Warren Beatty mentioned politics while presenting best picture nominees, stating that these films, like Moonlight by Barry Jenkins, showed the growing diversity in our society and our appreciation for diversity worldwide.

At this year’s Oscars, there was barely any mention of politics or Trump. The event maintained a consistent tone with other awards shows by keeping political issues at a distance from Hollywood. Despite the current administration tightening its grip on diversity initiatives that were previously celebrated as significant progress towards creating media content that better reflects global audiences, this has caused quite a stir in the industry. Trump’s efforts to dismantle diversity, equity, and inclusion policies have sent shockwaves through companies across the entertainment sector.

Disney has stopped mentioning its “Reimagine Tomorrow” initiative, established in 2021 to elevate underrepresented perspectives and employee development programs, in their recent reports to authorities. Additionally, on March 3rd, Walt Disney Animation Studios decided to cease production of the Tiana princess series, following an earlier decision to cancel a transgender storyline in the Pixar original animated series “Win or Lose.” This series will feature an openly Christian character, marking a first for the studio in nearly two decades.

It appears that several big entertainment companies, such as Amazon Studios, Paramount, and Warner Bros. Discovery, have scaled back their efforts towards diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). For instance, Amazon Studios has retracted policies aimed at enhancing diversity on its TV shows and movies, which included a goal to feature at least one character of color in speaking roles. Paramount has also eliminated objectives related to race, ethnicity, and gender in staffing, while Warner Bros. Discovery has broadened its talent development programs to accept applications from everyone. Notably, Apple Studios under its parent company continues to focus on DEI, albeit not in a way that could be considered discriminatory, such as through hiring quotas or targets. However, these companies are considering further modifications in their approaches to DEI.

For individuals belonging to minority groups, these programs often represent scarce avenues leading to a career within Hollywood’s industry. Showrunner Brigitte Muñoz-Liebowitz (of “Gordita Chronicles”) underscores the significance of NBC’s Writers on the Verge program, which was established in 2005 with the goal of preparing diverse writers for TV careers. She describes it as akin to winning the lottery – while there are limited spots available, they can provide you with an opportunity to gain entry into the industry when otherwise you may have no access.

Muñoz-Liebowitz often suggests these programs to writers as a means to get started in the field,” they note, having encountered the creator of ‘Gordita Chronicles’, Claudia Forestieri, who is an alumna of ABC Disney and HBOAccess writing programs, through this initiative.

It’s uncertain how these modifications might reshape the demographic landscape of Hollywood, as diversity initiatives within companies, which previously relied on affirmative action, have faced legal challenges for a long time, especially since the Supreme Court abolished affirmative action in a 2023 decision that affected race-based DEI efforts in private industries. Consequently, many policies no longer directly reference race, instead using indirect terms such as “underrepresented,” “underserved,” or “diverse perspectives.” The studios’ actions following Trump’s anti-DEI stance could indicate either a genuine shift away from promoting diversity or simply a continuation of their existing practices while making public declarations that DEI is no longer relevant, with any further efforts being carried out discreetly.

According to Karen Horne, a former senior vice president of DEI at WBD and the creator of multiple talent pipeline initiatives in the field, these companies remain committed to their tasks, but they are doing so more subtly rather than making a lot of noise about it.

The Sundance Institute’s renowned program for directors from historically marginalized backgrounds is not being phased out or altered, as confirmed by someone privy to the circumstances. Through this initiative, filmmakers are awarded an unconditional $25,000 grant, generously provided by Sundance and Disney Studios’ Project Advancement and Completion Fund. Sean Wang, the first recipient in 2023, was honored for his project Dìdi, a poignant Asian American coming-of-age tale set in his hometown of Fremont, California.

Further developments indicate that Paramount will carry on with multiple programs that could be labeled as DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) initiatives. Some of these projects welcome applicants from various backgrounds, while others, like the ViewFinder Emerging Directors Program and Supplier Diversity Program, also accept straight white male candidates.

However, depending on who you speak to, the Drive for Equity and Inclusion (DEI) did not provide a clear roadmap toward transforming Hollywood as promised by studios following George Floyd’s murder in 2020. Despite the widespread protests against police brutality that forced leading entertainment companies to express their commitment to diversity, the aftermath showed that the reckoning was brief. In just a 10-day period in 2023, four top-level DEI executives were removed from their positions in the C-suite.

There’s some debate among Americans about whether they will notice the absence of DEI initiatives, as a YouGov survey this year showed that nearly half of respondents supported ending DEI in schools and government, while slightly fewer were against it. In the corporate sector, the concern seems less about the intentions of these programs and more about their implementation. Many companies prefer to talk about “goals” or “targets” rather than “requirements” when connecting diversity with staffing, suggesting a preference for voluntary rather than mandatory action (implying potential concerns about reverse discrimination).

These initiatives were either overly broad or insufficiently stringent, making them at their best, admirable yet commonplace, and, at their worst, ineffective. For instance, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences introduced diversity standards for films in 2020, but these standards are so lenient that almost every title nominated for Best Picture over the past few decades would have qualified.

The Black Lives Matter movement’s impact was felt in Hollywood during a period of prosperity, as studios were eagerly investing in show creators to expand their streaming services with unique content. However, as economic downturn occurred and Wall Street focused on maximizing profits, shows perceived as catering exclusively to specific demographics have been abruptly cancelled. Now, studios are seeking content that appeals to a broader, more mainstream audience. This has sparked debate among many about why Hollywood seems disconnected from the wider American public.

It’s been suggested that some people believe the push for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) may have inadvertently distorted the objective of establishing fair hiring practices. Since 2022, the America First Legal Foundation, a conservative organization led by White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, has filed federal complaints against significant corporations such as Starbucks, Morgan Stanley, and BlackRock. Their argument is that corporate diversity initiatives and hiring strategies conflict with civil rights laws. Last year, they targeted what they considered discriminatory hiring quotas at Disney, specifically a policy mandating that at least half of the production and writing team come from underrepresented groups. The group also represents Brian Beneker, a script coordinator for SEAL Team, in a lawsuit against CBS Studios and its parent Paramount over alleged discrimination against straight white men. According to him, he was repeatedly denied a staff writer job following the implementation of an “illegal policy of race and sex balancing,” which allegedly prioritized the hiring of less qualified candidates who identify as minorities, LGBTQ individuals, or women.

A significant number of major corporations, such as those in media, entertainment, and tech industries, are now alerting their shareholders about the shifting business environment.

White & Case, a prominent corporate law firm, issued an advisory to its public clients in January, suggesting potential modifications they might need before their annual meetings. This was prompted by the policy goals set forth by the Trump administration. They recommended that businesses should meticulously review their Human Capital Management (HCM) disclosures, particularly those concerning Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programs, initiatives, and metrics. This review is crucial to ensure that these disclosures are current and in line with the company’s present priorities and policies.

Indeed, many companies now are doing just that.

As a supporter, I’ve noticed a growing trend of laws and policies that seem to oppose Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) principles or Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI). These include legislation, regulations, enforcement priorities, directives, initiatives, and even legal opinions. This complexity in regulations, coupled with the lack of uniformity across different jurisdictions where I operate, could potentially lead to increased compliance risks and costs. (Paramount’s latest 10-k annual report)

Warner Bros. Discovery, like many others, acknowledged the changing environment in their yearly report, and they subtly discontinued their quarterly “DEI Digest,” a publication that spotlighted the company’s efforts regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) matters.

As a gamer, I’ve noticed a shift recently – it seems like corporations are playing down Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) issues less in their official documents, such as proxies and annual reports. This trend has been reported by ISS-Corporate on March 4th.

According to ISS-Corporate, DEI factors will take up less prominence compared to the past years. Factors such as revealing diversity data in proxy documents, incorporating diversity indicators into executive compensation, and ensuring board diversity will be involved.

It’s possible that no corporation exemplifies the complexities surrounding diversity regulations quite like Pinterest. In its annual report published on February 6, they cautioned shareholders, stating: “If our efforts towards diversity, equity, and inclusion are deemed inadequate or excessive, we may struggle to attract and retain talent, face investigations, lawsuits, and other legal actions, and our brand reputation, market standing, and stock value could suffer.

In today’s context, it’s a dilemma we face: Insufficient diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) can be problematic, yet overemphasizing DEI may also lead to issues.

With Trump’s persistent efforts to limit Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI), it falls upon individual corporations to assess their readiness for potential legal disputes and government scrutiny. Making choices in such complex circumstances isn’t simple. The ongoing cases involving Paramount Global and Comcast, companies already under investigation by government agencies, might suggest they choose to persist with their current course of action.

Horne notes that, unless your company receives federal funding, it’s not obligated to comply with their demands. However, it’s crucial to understand that this administration may act in a retaliatory manner.

Originally published in the March 6 edition of The Hollywood Reporter magazine, you can get a subscription here to read more such stories.

Read More

2025-03-06 17:25