nepotism in film industry essay

Cinemaphile

Why so much nepotism in the film industry nowadays

Back then, you either had talent, looks, or you got fricked by the right person to establish yourself in the film industry. Now every actor/actress/director/writer has some parent in the film industry that got them the connections. Pic related.

they made a lot more movies then so easier to get a role? except nowadays there's a lot of tv streaming stuff, don't know if anyone will break through from that to being a lead

Nepotism has always existed in Hollywood even back then, take Michael Douglas, Sofia Coppola; but there's still some social mobility for outsiders to get in, so it sorta even out. Now it's uncontrollable in comparison. The social mobility aspect while still exist in the form of e-celebs getting in the industry, has slowly dwindling

>take Michael Douglas and Sophia Coppola Why not take Kirk Douglas and Francis Coppola instead of playing stupid?

>Nepotism has always existed it has but not like this, holy fricking shit. good luck getting a role while auditioning during the day and waiting tables at night to support yourself. just be born as the producers third cousins son bro

>good luck getting a role Yeah good luck inheriting an oil fortune or a dam kingdom without being the king’s child or marrying in. I mean come on man. Ever hear of a little continent called Europe?

Like really think about what you’re saying and evaluate the class mobility and job options of the layman in history. Ask yourself how you’re supposed to find time for promotion as a farmer, peasant, or even a merchant. I don’t know what rich history of upstarted workers you think you’re talking about

The vast vast vast majority of human history had near zero social mobility, which makes the little bubble between like 1830 and 1980 all the more impressive

Right, which is why, as nice as it was, it was an economic anomaly. There was a time of such plenty that the need for high paying ‘luxury’ work required the employment and elevation of lower classes. This is incredibly rare in the scope of human history

No it's always existed to this degree. Every industry has nepotism however acting being a non "hard skill" job is even more susceptible to it. Meaning if you higher your son but he isn't a good engineer your slope will fail and it's pretty obvious why, if you higher your son to be an actor and he isn't a good actor it is way harder to draw a direct line of failure to just them.

Unless you're Alec Baldwin, who murders people just as efficiently as failing slopes.

>imagine the smell

Yeah I was gonna say that Hollywood's always been a nepotistic circel-jerk. The only real difference now is that Hollywood's dying/in its death-throws (probably - shit might change for some reason and it might bounce back. Probably not but who knows) so it's harder than ever to break into the business with something low or mid budget or some indie hit hence why the nepotism's more obvious than ever

Paul Mescal went from Aftersun to Gladiator 2. It can happen, if you're damn good and what they need at that time.

The most beautiful women aren’t in movies anymore. They don’t even need to be. They can just smile in a picture and get millions of dollars thrown at them.

Better delivery methods of beautiful women, really. I’d wager Hollywood is losing millions to OnlyFans who do the job they used to do better

They're on onlyfans now. And that's better.

Everything is more nepotistic now. The reason is population siloing such that insiders never come across talented outsiders. This was not entirely by design

Only rich and/or connected people can afford it these days. It's also pretty crazy to look at all the high level britbong actors and realize that they all went to prestigious private schools.

You hear gossip, sometimes confirmed by the subjects, that successful actors started out by being some rich person (usually male)'s live-in lover (kept man/boy.) Depardieu said he survived at 15 this way. Prostitution.

i don't know how much more of all this i can take, friends.

everything. not just this.

the culture war is fueling nepotism all across the board like never before. everyone hurrying to get their resident "upvoters" installed

being a merchant marine is just being a sailor on a commercial vessel it's not like being a marine

It’s being a modern sailor which means something

And the human head weighs 8 pounds. Was there some point you were trying to make?

yeah, we know that, what's your point ?

all marines are merchant marines these days, if you get my drift

Nepotism is natural. Why wouldn't you help someone you know or are related to out? Especially in an industrial that doesn't affect anything like Hollywood.

Yeah i never got this, if i have a company and my brother needs a job im gonna give it to my brother before anyone else. I dont understand how thats bad in any way?

Just if your brother is an idiot who isn’t up to the job. Like imagine if Godfather 3 featured the director’s daughter and she was flat and unconvincing. Something like that

promoting untalented people never works out for anyone, in acting or otherwise.

nepotism is bad in business for these reasons: >everyone knows people who are related or members of the same lodge or perhaps both from india will give each other a pass. >when it comes time for promotions etc, you know you're always getting fricked over >causes people to not give a frick and stop working. the people with nepotism feel bulletproof so they stop trying hard. the people who feel left out feel like it's pointless to try hard

Plus it makes it harder for me to get at that money!!!

>it's bad to want money

I didn’t say that, was just being playful. Yes a real reason is that it inhibits class mobility, money making opportunities for those truly capable of doing the job, and in general peoples’ hope for a better earned future

So either make your own buisness or make be that much better than others AND leverage that with your boss. Talented or hardworking people who can't sell themselves are infinitely more frustrating than okay workers who know how to get more for their work.

I think the theory here is eligible workers are replaced with less eligible ones to keep cash in the family

Right and everyone knows that. You don't need the absolute best worker to do a job, why wouldn't you setup your kid if he does a "good enough" job.

is the logic behind that.

Fair enough. We do have shoddy actors though, it’s hard to say Sophia Coppola cut it

I'm just going off Wiki here but she took the role after Winnoa Ryder dropped out and pretty much didn't get an acting career because she was so shit. This kinda proves that the evil nepotism isn't powerful enough to truly force an awful actress. Remember that it's Friday, Friday, Friday song, it was written and produced by a company that exists solely to make pop stars out of millionaires kids. And it works kinda, I still remember the shit song, but it isn't powerful enough to give staying power to these silver spoons.

Sure. Nice little boost though, they can channel millions to some untalented kid. Though I’m sure the parents’ investment ate up a lot of what their kid earned. I imagine it’s really some way to use wealthy parents’ seed money to pay a production staff to ‘make their kid a star’

I'm talking out of my ass at this point but I don't think it's a money laundering scheme I think it is a get enough money and when your daughter tells you "I want to be a popstar!" instead of telling her to shut up like a decent parent you just say yes and go back to ignoring the kid.

you really are blinding yourself how these histrionic and munchausen by proxy types operate, most of the time the kid doesnt even care about it they just want to go to school and have normal friends, see nick and disney kids. Its the parents who want to milk them for all they can be worth.

Right and everyone knows that. You don't need the absolute best worker to do a job, why wouldn't you setup your kid if he does a "good enough" job. [...] is the logic behind that.

the biggest nepotism issue is with people of different ethnic backgrounds and religions having bias for each other. indians seem to be quite open about this, i think it's because they're used to their caste system.

What is the issue here? It's not a surprise, we have Chinatowns, we have israeli neighborhoods, we have the suburbs. Tribes gathering and keeping money within their own community is just good business. If people would be more honest then the deception in in all of this would be gone.

I want me and mine to do better than you and yours.

Universally practiced statement, universally believed, impossible to talk about.

Oftentimes this is why people consider liberalism the enemy. I’m liable to go either way on this given the situation, but then again I’m some strange American opportunist

the issue here is that conveniently it has been shilled for 2000 years that christians are supposed to be meek and seek pride in poverty. this 'i want me and mine to do better' mentality is not in the fabric of western civilization and people are still being naively taken advantage of to this day.

>this 'i want me and mine to do better' mentality is not in the fabric of western civilization

I don't know what to make of a statement I find so profoundly untrue. American culture has never taken pride in being poor despite it being Biblical. American approach to that is usually if I get more money, I can give more to charity.

And what part of the Scramble For Africa was the west not violently getting theirs at the cost of the rest? What part of the Opium Wars was the west not violently getting theirs at the cost of the rest?

I'm not saying these things in condemnation of them I'm just really flabbergasted that you think the west has taken the meek and humble and not self aggrandizing portions of the Bible to heart.

Yeah I’m with the other anon, have you looked into other cultures and nations or is this just something you pulled out of your ass in a second

Sounds more like the writers and producers.

It really do be like that

Based Alain 'Vietnam fricking shit' Delon.

Or when guys who are already actors decide to enlist anyway. I can't imagine anyone today who'd willingly join up in any hypothetical conflict.

I miss old classic Hollywood when it was run by and for gentiles.

>classic Hollywood >run by and for gentiles.

It used to be the case where if you could drive you could be a truck driver. And then if you got bored and weren't physically disabled you could go and work on a merchant marine vessel. And then when you got bored of that if you weren't mentally disabled you could fill out an application form at Boeing and they'd train you to make spaceplanes. Now if you want to lift a box, carry the box and put the box down you need 10 years industry experience, a post graduate degree and 30,000 dollars in additional training & certificates. And your own insurance, which you won't get because frick you, that's why.

I’m not sure that’s completely true

It's 100% absolutely completely true

Exaggerating won’t get you anywhere

This. I got my first (75k a year) job by just looking my boss in the eye and shaking his hand the first time I walked into the office

>t. managing director at the Institute of Handshake Innovation

We’ve been global innovators for years.

that's definitely not true. the problem with today is no one wants to work their way up. we don't have teenagers working the cheap jobs anymore

>just 20 more years of hard work and I'm sure to make assistant vice department manager, then I'll be able to afford a third pair of shoes

>maybe I’ll be able to fill my cars gas tank up to half this week!

if you spend 20 years slinging tacos at taco bell that's your problem

If you aren't hitting your boss up for a raise annually or demanding quarter/semi yearly reviews and using these are opportunities to advance yourself that is you fricking up idiot. What's the worst they can do? Fire you from a job you are apparently too good for anyway.

This is what I'm saying. Comfort and stability leads to this beaureacratization of everything which impedes social stability.

You’re correct and the autists can’t pick up on your mild exaggeration.

>and they'll still put in some FOB 'dreamer' import and pay him under that table, or some H1B visa pajeet

Based Orson talked about this several decades ago.

alright before you post anything else, ask yourself ‘have I ever blamed my parents for not producing or leaving better inheritance for me’

boomers shit and piss away every last drop of their own inherited fortune they were given to spend the last few years vacationing in florida. every single one of them.

Right, so you’d prefer nepotism

i dont really see a problem with it. no shit you are going to leave your kids something to work with

Alright so nepotism’s fine then. You may know the score, but I’ll ask the rest of these anons if they get the big picture too

No, nepotism is bad

Then how can you ask for free boomer wealth to be given to you by parents? Suddenly the meritocracy doesn’t matter now?

That's why it's not fair you idiot, because not everyone was born into a wealthy family and that shouldn't hamper your success. It doesn't do any good to blame people for something if you're not going to give them comeuppance.

Sure, so if your parents have money or property and you’re mad you didn’t get it, saying it belonged to you, you’re an advocate for nepotism.

My parents have nothing to leave for me and my grandparents left nothing for them.

Right, so you hate nepotism for not helping you but like nepotism because in another situation you would have gotten paid out.

I have absolutely no idea what you mean.

If your parents had money would you want them to give it to you

No, I'd want them to pay off their mortgage so they can retire happily.

Nice. Well good for you.

It's not fair isn't an argument, where did you get the impression life was going to be fair?

I'm not talking about life, I'm talking about acting. Talent competition is supposed to be fair otherwise it's not worth watching. How about we put two high school teams in the next Super Bowl because someone's dad works for the NFL? Nobody wants to see that shit.

Oh here is why it's more prevalent in acting then.

If we took your football example it'd be pretty obvious to draw the direct line from "this is shitty football" to "why is no one watching this". There are really few actors who are able to singlehandlely tank a movie, and movies fail for so many reasons it's not going to happen that people link this guy getting the role to this movie failing. Take The Flash and try to come up with all the reasons why it's failed and amongst all those reasons the leading man being a social pariah ontop of being a shit actor still isn't enough for him to take all the blame for it.

Media really is a miasma of a business, the pay would be nice but I’m glad I’m not a decision maker or even subordinate in this industry

It might be stupidly fun but I can't imagine having to promote a movie you couldn't give a shit about. Movie making looks fun, movie selling looks like hell.

Nobody wants to see capeshit anymore, and capeshit is a good metaphor for nepotism, they get studio green lights solely based on the past success of other films and the directors get comfortable and presumptuous and make a terrible product as a result.

Did you understand the point I was trying to make though? I was talking about the value of actors and their relation to the failure of a movie.

>Nobody wants to see capeshit anymore i wish this were true but another capeshit movie (spiderman) fricking killed it in the box office just before flash this fricking dogshit genre still has plenty of life left unfortunately

Basically when a nation goes too long without negative feedback everything congeals and solidifies into a lifeless blob of maximal comfort and minimal change. We Americans are victims of our own success.

i feel like they didn't vet people as much back then. Now you have to be super-vetted and trusted

My man vetted quite a few beautiful women. Now all we have are quadroons and ugly as frick inbred mutts. What is going on, bring him back.

>why is there so much nepotism in [hugely profitable industry]? no idea, it's a genuine mystery OP. We may never know why wealthy people ensure their children get into a lucrative line of work.

Because of corruption in the financial sector. Hollywood doesn't need consumer money to survive. If they bankrupt, the bank saves them and if the bank bankrupts, then the government bails them out which raises national debt and makes consumers pay via higher cost of living. You pay for their propaganda even if it fails. That's why they won't stop doing it. Fix the banking system and you fix the world.

youre such a moron

There is literally nothing wrong with nepotism. Everyone that seethes about it either had lazy moronic parents/grandparents or are 2nd generation immigrants.

t. talentless nepo baby who could never make it on his own merits

>le meritocracy Not how the world works bucko, try actually making connections with people.

I know, that's why the worlds a fricking basket case.

Not for the people who know how the world works and play by the actual rules. Oh and be white, always be white.

those who got in early made sure their kids had an easy way in.

Better than a welfare parasite

[...] I miss old classic Hollywood when it was run by and for gentiles.

Why don’t incels just get a job and make their own shit instead of demanding affirmative action so they can compete

For me it’s just not spending my already ample income on drugs

There's another element to this that if you were well read you would have picked up on. WW2 was the end of history. There are quite literally no more events of note left for man to participate in that are greater than himself to shape him. Authors in the 70s and 80s figured this out and talked about it. Modern man's ability to be destructive has been enabled by technology to such a degree that the results of a truly meaningful conflict would be apocalyptic. So culture has been puppeteered in a way to prevent such atrocity. This is why the next foundation shaking events involve the removal of humans from the stage entirely. We can no longer embody the great archetypes because we have become too powerful relative to our weak minds. Ares with a spear is peak mankind. Ares with a machinegun begets nothing but ruin and desolation. Of course you aren't going to see great men because there are no events left to make great men.

>Ww2 was the end of history This is just a selfish attempt at retirement, though. Obviously dynamics continue to change, history continues, the whole idea it was all settled is a tired idea from people who couldn’t imagine something like decay or dissatisfaction with the settlement of that war

Anon they managed to wrangle and control the 50s-00s without the internet. Now they have the embodiment of the all seeing eye in your pocket. There is no chance in hell history can grow in these conditions. There was still a chance when the radio and television were around but they managed to navigate that period flawlessly. The sheer bulwark of golems curated by operant conditioning that starts at birth assassinates any vitalizing ideology in the nest. The message is clear: human history is over and we are transitioning to total human irrelevance. All because you quite literally cannot adapt the minds of morons fast enough no matter how much education you throw at them. They are too stupid to embody human ideals safely relative to their destructive potential afforded by technology. The goal was simple: divide and distract. Grow the ego and convince distracted children that the heights of human consciousness end with the individual rather than that being the starting line of adulthood and the end of childhood. Mass infantalization.

Even so, there’s probably a next step. It isn’t quite now how it was right back then. Call me crazy.

>hideous israelites are 100% in charge >they cast actors they want to frick, the hottest people on earth make it to hollywood >some of those actors have a solid career, they build influence, some start producing their own movies >they're not hideous israelites, so they don't feel the need to use their position to manipulate others into fricking them >instead they just cast their whole circle, their kids, their friends, friends of friends, their friends' kids...

Oh yeah and why is that

This is BRAD PITT coded.

>uncle system >ethno-religious tribalism >5th column political tribalism Boomers are the capstone of this 100 years of having the film production market cornered and they are in the process of riding it into the catabolic collapse ground. Let it rot, Gen X & co. will pick up the pieces around the margins.

Incel thread

Meanwhile the whitest of 14 year olds can make millions just clowning around on twitch. Why get into Hollywood nowadays? It’s dying, and very painfully

The whole streaming, podcast and youtube sphere works exactly like hollywood now. All the big "creators" are managed by agencies. They network, do collabs, agree on what the "consensus" is going to be and so on.

Honestly if you're smart you just learn to play the game they've made out of modern society. Don't buy food from restaurants owned by people other than your own ethnic group, don't buy entertainment from people outside your own ethnic group, don't hand resources to people outside your own ethnic group unless you absolutely have to. Money flows to family, friends, ethnic group, close ethnic groups, foreigners in that order. Only hire people from your own ethnic group. Unless you have over 250 employees and are publicly traded it's not even an issue in the US to do this so long as you don't tell people "i'm not hiring you because you are an X".

Not every employer is upstanding. To cut costs, they hire illegals working for pennies.

forgot: homeschooled. So, many, homeschooled actors, untraumatized from public schools. Quite an unfair advantage.

That bio is more apt for the 30s and 40s. Most actors by the 60s and 70s came from well to do families and went to school to study the profession.

I was perfectly alright with nepotism. But then Dakota Johnson happened.

homosexual is just mad because he doesn't have connections and has to do shit like this for a living. anyway, what even is the point of hiring some random crook instead of a kid who has famous parents (=free promotion for the movies) and actually went to acting school

>nepotistic now

Kek it’s always been like this

I wish dafne keen would nepotism her way into some underwear ads.

yes this point gets brought up in stickies when 50+ actors pass.

Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save name for the next time I post.

Nepotism In Film Industry

It’s become amply clear in recent months that much as we love Bollywood, we love to hate it more. The film industry has become the default punching bag for the self-righteous, sermonising denizens of social media. Every time there 's a pressing social issue at hand — from feminism to nepotism — it seems like this bunch wants our stars to lead the way and set a moral example, even while they sit on their asses and watch the drama unfold. I can 't imagine why we’ve set these lofty ideals for an industry that can 't be relied upon to churn out three half-decent movies in a year. But in the Republic of Offense, where fury is manufactured with stunning proficiency every breathing minute, I guess it makes for great optics to have a public figure …show more content…

The Internet chatterati were predictably outraged by the filmmakers ' pragmatic decision to cow down rather than face a stalled film and mounting losses. I guess when you live in the la la land of Twitter & Instagram, where everything is virtual and nothing has consequences, it becomes difficult to get in sync with the issues of the real world. And that 's a problem. Because while it 's great that we 've begun a conversation about issues long brushed under the carpet like nepotism and equal pay, quite frankly we are barking up the wrong tree. Every time the debate on nepotism is relegated to Bollywood – where decisions are made keeping business outcomes in mind - we are ignoring how it 's staring us in the face in real, consequential terms in our polity, bureaucracy, and public life. Every time we focus on pay gaps only in the context of movie stars, we are ignoring the real debate on why women aren 't able to crack the glass ceiling in corporate India despite being on an equal footing with men. Let 's fume and froth occasionally about real things that matter to real people. Let 's imagine newer contexts beyond Bollywood to have intelligent debates. Let 's leave the stars alone in their own orbit. They aren 't worth obsessing about to this degree, because that’s exactly what feeds the cult of

The Star Of Bethlehem, Mr. Larson's Use Of Ethos

What Mr. Larson went through to find out about the star seemed to be very stressful to him and I’m shocked he still tried to find out more and more about the star. Mr. Larson made the documentary very impactful to the audience and myself, but he also gave strong evidence about his argument with the uses of ethos, logos, and pathos. In the use of ethos, Mr. Larson uses this with his expression with religion. The way he expresses his information, is through the Bible and how the Bible explains the finding of the star.

Gentlemen Prefer Blonde Film Essay

In the 1953 film adaptation of Gentlemen Prefer Blondes there are two main characters complemented by a group of men. Lorelei Lee, played by Marilyn Monroe, is a young entertainer who is obsessed with diamonds and can point them out anywhere. Dorothy Shaw, Lorelei’s friend and also an entertainer, is Lorelei’s confidant and chaperone on their trip to Paris. The main portion of the film is played out on a boat, which is where a majority of the sexual nature is formed. Lorelei and Dorothy aren’t the only passengers and no doubt there are some male counterparts.

A Raisin In The Sun Film Analysis Essay

A Raisin in the Sun PBA Unit 2 Cinematography and filmmaking are art forms completely open to interpretation in many ways such lighting, the camera as angles, tone, expressions, etc. By using cinematic techniques a filmmaker can make a film communicate to the viewer on different levels including emotional and social. Play writes include some stage direction and instruction regarding the visual aspect of the story. In this sense, the filmmaker has the strong basis for adapting a play to the big screen. “A Raisin in the Sun” is a play by Lorraine Hansberry that debuted on Broadway in 1959.

History Vs. Hollywood: The Untouchables

History Vs. Hollywood: The Untouchables The Untouchables is an action packed movie, set in Chicago, 1920s. Crime controls the city, the system has gone corrupt, and people are dying.

Analysis Of Hollywood: The Dream Factory By Hortense Powdermaker

Due to her book "Hollywood: The Dream Factory. An Anthropologist Looks at the Movie Makers" Hortense Powdermaker is regarded as one of the pioneers of ethnography. Published in 1951 by Secker & Warburg in London, Powdermaker here aims to demystify the affect of movies on the audience and establishes the hypothesis "that the social system in which they are made significantly influences their content and meaning" (Powdermaker, 1951, p.3). After living in Hollywood for one year she concludes that the internal structures resemble those of a totalitarian system in which the struggle between business and art is reflected in the meaning of its movies. It suggests that the values of studio bosses and producers dominate while the artistic values of directors and writers are strongly restricted.

Criminology In Crime Movies

There is a type in Hollywood’s crime films that deals with the criminology as a social phenomenon which controls the human beings or certain groups in a realistic style we all know it’s in our society or other communities, those films address the criminality in a sociological way. The second type of movies, violence and murder appears but they characters are actually not real, they are either a myth or some kind of fantasy that doesn’t exist, like zombies as an example, this type attracts a lot of viewers, however, the mental and emotional feelings interact with each but to a certain point, even if the viewer liked the plot or the story effected him, he still disconnects, loses concentration of the idea and realises that such a story is just a fantasy because in real life zombies don’t exist. Although, the effect of those films which focus on the instincts should still be in consideration because they could still effect some groups with psychological problems that are in a risk of schizophrenia through any kind of a shock, especially if they got addicted to those kind of films, it can push them to believe those stories and separate them from reality, the consequences can be bad that can actually lead them to have the desire to hurt others because of hallucinations or strange ideas that may

Gender Pay Gap In The 1970's

Gender gap was started to be seen as a social, economic and political issue in the 1970’s. During this time proponents of equal rights and especially feminists fought for social equality for women including same wage comparing with men. Gender pay gap is considered to be the difference in men’s and women’s median earnings doing the same job. Even though over a past few years the gap was decreasing, at the moment it is still considerable. According Eurostat, in 2014 women 's gross hourly earnings were on average 16.1% below those of men in the European Union.

Essay On Grease The Movie

Crashing waves on a beach with a magnificent sunset in the background, a picture perfect scene for a summer romance. The magic mood is quickly turned gloomy by the sweet Australian accent of Sandy Olsson exchanging her goodbyes with her summer love, Danny Zuko. The opening scene of Grease may seem [depressing] but it sets up for one of the most interesting love stories put to film. Grease is a movie with great musical numbers accompanied with wonderfully executed dance routines and an unforgettable plot. Although there are questionable incidents throughout, it will always be classic.

Lack Of Diversity In Film Essay

Almost half a century after the death of Jim Crow laws segregating African Americans, racism seems to be subdued publicly. The subject of racial discrimination has become more sensitive; any event that hint at racial inequality generally receive public condemn. There are rarely any requirement for government intervention or law modification to correct racism and relieve public tension. From the years of 2000 to 2017, there has not been a single legal case regarding Civil Rights according to the Library of Congress.

Movie Essay: The Black Eye Of The Month Club

What would you do if you where part of the “Black Eye of the Month Club?” How would you feel if you where called names constantly and made fun of your physical features? This is what Junior has to go though every day on the reservation and at school. How does he handle all of this criticism? He draws comics about his daily experiences.

How Does Hollywood Affect Society

There is no doubt that Hollywood has many influences on society especially on young age. The term “Hollywood” refers to the film industry where located to the west and northwest of downtown Los Angeles, California (“Where is Hollywood,” n.d.). Not only in Los Angeles that television shows and movies of Hollywood are popular but also all around the country and worldwide. The audiences of Hollywood’s products are in various age starting from little kids to elders. Hollywood has incredible ability to spread believes, cultures, morals and even political influence on society.

Films Influence On Culture

Through movies’ ability to stay grounded in some truths, yet also push social boundaries, it is clear that films shape culture, and culture shapes film, making more important now than ever that filmmakers are aware of what they are putting out and the implications they will have. Not every movie producer

Slumdog Millionaire Analysis

In the academy award winning film ‘Slumdog millionaire’ directed by Danny Boyle, Main character Jamal Malik played by Dev Patel faces many challenges living on the streets and in the slums of Mumbai, India. During the film, Jamal experiences the death of a loved one and extreme poverty adding to the challenges put upon him. Throughout the film ‘Slumdog millionaire’ Danny Boyle’s challenges help viewers to understand characters and manifest the theme “Brutality of Humanity”. The key challenge in the film that helps us understand the Theme of Beauty and Brutality of Humanity is overcoming poverty. Danny Boyle utilises film techniques such as Costuming, Camera shots and Dialogue to show the theme “Brutality of Humanity”.

Essay On Acting

What is acting? Acting is where one person takes in the role, behavior, attitudes, and other traits of another person or character in a script for either a film or play. With an acting major you will spend a lot of time working on your body and the way you move on stage. In most acting majors you will have six main classes that you must take to graduate. You will have to have a class for acting, voice for actors, movement, improvisation, theatre history, and maybe an actor coaching class depending on what college you go to.

Essay On Gender Inequality In India

Women are perceived to be disadvantaged at work. Indian laws on Rape, Dowry and Adultery have women 's safety at heart, but these highly discriminatory practices are still taking place at an alarming rate. Gender discrimination in India refers to health, education, economic and political inequalities between men and women. Gender inequalities, and its social causes, impact India 's sex ratio, women 's health over their lifetimes, their educational attainment, and economic conditions. Gender inequality in India is a various issue that concerns

More about Nepotism In Film Industry

Related topics.

• Nineteen Eighty-Four
• United States
• Big Brother

• Australia edition
• Europe edition
• International edition

Researchers find 'culture of nepotism' in British film industry

Report shows striking lack of diversity and ‘significant obstacles’ for outsiders looking to break into industry

Nepotism, word-of-mouth employment practices and the widespread use of unpaid work experience have created a “pandemic lack of inclusion” in the British film industry, a report backed by movie producers Barbara Broccoli and Kathleen Kennedy says.

Broccoli, producer of James Bond movies, and Kennedy, president of the Star Wars film-maker Lucasfilm, are throwing their weight behind a plan, backed by £20m of national lottery money, to improve diversity in the sector.

The report on film employment, whether of camera operators, riggers, props or hairdressers, shows a striking lack of diversity and “significant obstacles” to people getting jobs in the first place.

Heather Carey, an associate consultant at the Work Foundation thinktank, led the data research for the report and found major barriers. “There is a culture of nepotism and a lot of the employers we spoke to just recruit via word of mouth,” she said.

“You tend to get that a bit in certain industries but in this industry it is kind of … that’s how it’s done. If you don’t have the network it is incredibly difficult to get in and progress.”

Added to that were few opportunities for apprenticeships and the employment of people on unpaid work experience for long periods all helping to create “a pandemic lack of inclusion in this industry”, Carey said.

The research was commissioned by the BFI and forms part of a report and 10-point action plan submitted to the culture secretary, Karen Bradley, on Wednesday evening. The plan was overseen by a taskforce chaired by Broccoli.

The audit of the film industry found:

Only 3% of the film production workforce is from a minority ethnic background, compared with 12.5% nationally.

Women make up 40% of the workforce and are paid £3,000 less on average than male counterparts.

Only 12% of the workforce is from less advantaged socio-economic backgrounds.

Just 5% of screen workers consider themselves disabled.

A labour supply problem is on the horizon because too many potential entrants are studying media and communications rather than more technical areas.

Getting your foot in the door is difficult unless you are from a privileged background, with the average worker doing 46 days of unpaid work experience before gaining their first “official” position.

There is a sense among many that the industry is a “closed shop” with producers wanting to use the same crews over and again.

The film industry is facing shortages of a variety of skilled workers from make-up artists to carpenters to business analysts but Carey said there was a lack of awareness that the opportunities even existed.

Film production in the UK is buoyant and growing, with 56 films beginning production in the first three months of 2017.

The UK film sector currently employs 66,000 people and the report estimates that 10,000 new workers will be needed over the next five years.

Broccoli agreed to chair the taskforce after becoming aware of the skills shortage while filming the Bond movies at Pinewood. She said: “We live in a diverse society and it is vital both culturally and commercially that our industry reflects this in front of and behind the camera.

“With industry, education and government uniting behind this new strategy and action plan we know that we will be able to increase the number of people working in film and ensure we have a representative workforce.”

The BFI has pledged £20m of national lottery money to start the action plan, which includes measures to demystify getting in to the film industry as well as bursaries and schemes to encourage industry practitioners to share their knowledge and expertise.

Lucasfilm is supporting the initiative and has a training programme which could provide a model for other productions.

It currently has 28 trainees working on the untitled Han Solo film being made this year at Pinewood . On the programme, 75% of the trainees are women, 45% from BAME backgrounds, 68% were recruited from outside Greater London and 36% received free meals at school.

Kennedy said: “This initiative is meaningful for both Lucasfilm and the film industry at large. Diversity is just as important behind the scenes as it is on screen. More points of view, more perspectives, and more voices will only make films better.”

The chief executive of the BFI, Amanda Nevill, said there was no magic wand to solve the skills problems. She said: “We approach this quite humbly but we know what needs to be done and the good thing is that this whole piece of work was ignited by the industry itself ... We know the industry is ready to change the way they do things in order to fix this.”

• Film industry
• Social exclusion

Comments (…)

Most viewed.

The Heights Herald

Nepotism in film industry reaches fever pitch

Story by Makagbe Sanoe , A&E Editor | January 23, 2023

Danquyen Le

Well-known but nepo-priveliged directors and actors, such as Jaden Smith, win awards from BET, NAACP and more, other new and upcoming talents get cast into the shadows.

This story was originally published in the Heights Herald print edition.

A ubiquity of “birth-bounded” fame and hereditary success is back in full swing.

Nepotism, which is most commonly known as being prevalent in the American film industry, is the act of favoritism by use of fame and influence. Several household names such as Micheal Jackson (son of R&B music mogul Joe Jackson), Johnny Depp, and many others have heavily benefited from nepotism, leading to an overbearing notoriety and celebrity. Monarchies, primarily the Great Britain Royal Family, also fall under an “elitist” branch of nepotism. 

Nepotism is deeply rooted in the film industry in particular because of the ascendancy many family lineages hold in the entertainment business. In other words, success begets success. For children who’ve developed fame because of nepotism, it’s an unspoken expectation that their talent is automatically on par with their parents, even if (more times than not) this isn’t the case. Connections their parents have made in the industry also aid in their already successful careers simply from birth. This has led to countless upcoming actresses and actors to get overshadowed by lesser-qualified, but famous, “nepo-babies”. The inequity doesn’t simply end with the actors themselves—it also trickles down to directors and screenwriters as well. Authoritative roles in the film industry are scarce and distinct, with many award-winning actors and actresses dismissing work from less connected directors, often being from BIPOC, queer and women artists. 

An overlying question to this never-ending sprawl of family-driven success is what casting directors can do to limit the effects of nepotism within the industry. What would the basic criteria entail, and how would it be successfully implemented? Would stricter criteria being put in place be viewed as too critical by those in the industry? 

However, inheriting fame due to nepotism doesn’t automatically erase genuine talent. Sofia Coppola, three-time Oscar nominee who directed films such as “The Virgin Suicides” and “Lost in Translation”, who is daughter of Francis and Eleanor Coppola; both having extremely successful careers within screenwriting. We can’t deny the fact that having successful parents within the Hollywood scene hadn’t aided in her success, but she’s proven that she can truly contribute worthwhile art to the medium, not just coast by on her last name. 

These exceptions, unfortunately, only prove the rule. Capitalism and the reliance on name recognition uprooting the creative marketplace has exceedingly increased over the years, as we’ve seen examples throughout decades of film-culture, but how can viewers shift the limelight to smaller budgeted films? Simply by watching. It isn’t a tedious, or excruciatingly hard process. Independent films are crucial because of the topics they entail that often get overlooked, such as social movements, LGBTQ+ topics, and many many more. “Moonlight” and “Rift” are both excellent and well-directed independent films that are easy to find and stream online. 

Nepotism and its hard-to-break cycle of reinforcing the status quo isn’t going to end anytime soon, but being aware of those who are in positions of privilege because of it, and seeking out the works of those who get overshadowed by the mainstream, is the first and arguably most important step.

Makagbe Sanoe is the newest A&E Editor for The Heights Herald. This is her third year on the school newspaper. She’s a junior who enjoys literature...

Danquyen Le is an adventurous staff writer and podcaster who is always down to have fun and lives by the motto “You never know until you try!” She...

Controversial bill aims to protect young internet users, fails to consider ramifications

What’s all this buzz about pollinators?

Abuse victims continue to face trauma, lack of justice

After-school activity inequities persist

Central Avenue proves dangerous to all

Fahrenheit 451 pt. 2: Instead of burning books, they’re banning them

Grade inflation: Myth or fact?

France’s abaya ban is unjust, anti-freedom

Ongoing crisis in Palestine and Israel raises awareness, exposes biases

Parasocial relationships rise, invite complication in the Information Age

The Student News Site of Columbia Heights High School

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

With roots in kinship and stardom, how Bollywood continues to fuel nepotism despite being an 'industry'

2020, Firstpost

[Article arguing for the historical roots of nepotism in Bollywood via political economy] Firstpost blurb: Nepotism is encouraged, above all, by a film industry marked by high risk and volatility. Under such circumstances, the star – who accumulates an almost divine aura in his person – comes to be the biggest investment the producer makes to guarantee a film’s success.

Related Papers

Mark Lorenzen

Abstract: In this paper, we use the theoretical framework of overlapping fields to argue that underlying informal institutions of a society impact the economy. To illustrate our argument we present primary data collected in 46 interviews and multiple case studies in the Indian film industry, Bollywood, and an archival study of film industries and Indian culture. Our findings show, that the Indian family is an institution that permeates even industries normally characterized by weak tie relations. The Banyan tree symbolizes this interconnectedness ...

Dr. Amrita Goswami (PhD)

This article focuses on the current phase in the Hindi Film Industry in Bombay which is characterized by a new corporate logic coming into play since 2000 that looks at a lm as a product, and then goes about packaging it, branding it and presenting it to a predetermined audience. This shift is characteristic of the processes of the mainstream lm industry with the onset of corporate-run Production Houses (It is a conscious decision on my part to use the term 'Production House' and not Studios.) that came about with the transition of the Hindi lm industry from an unorganized industry to that of a corporatized body after being accorded Industry status in 1998 ('Film Accorded Industry Status', Business Line, October 19, 2000 http://www.indiaserver.com/businessline/2000/10/19/stories/141918re.htm). I am using the term 'Production House/s' despite the fact that lm companies use the term Studio in their nomenclature, because unlike the Studios in the early Indian cinema landscape, these are multinational corporations that have an entirely dierent logic of lm production and labour. This logic is what I attempt to discuss in this article. The methodology I have used for arriving at my understanding of how this Production House culture works is informed by ethnographic techniques of qualitative interviews with people working in the Hindi Film Industry in dierent capacities, participant observation on locations and sets, and using the technique of observing a day-in-the-life of an industry professional at work. In this article, I have located my arguments within the area of Film Industry studies. Since Hollywood forms the best analogy for mainstream cinemas in India, I have looked at the work on the Hollywood industry, the best known of which is by Bordwell, Staiger and Thompson (xvi–xvii) who describe classical Hollywood cinema as 'a distinct artistic and economic phenomenon' (xvi–xvii) and have attempted to show how 'the concept of a mode of lm practice can historicize textual analysis and connect the history of lm style to the history of the motion picture industry' (xvii). Here, I would like to draw the reader's attention to the commodity nature of Hindi lms by exploring the process that is involved in turning

Journal of International Management

This paper combines evolutionary perspectives with social network theory in order to explain the recent growth of a prolific and changing indigenous industry in an emergent economy, namely the Indian film industry in Mumbai, India, Bollywood. Using novel and original data, the paper argues that as the world's biggest commercial film cluster and a conspicuous growth phenomenon, Bollywood can be seen as a paradigmatic case for developing general insights into indigenous growth of industries in emerging economies. The paper demonstrates how the existence of a well-defined and geographically centered social network among producers, directors and other key roles in filmmaking in Mumbai influences the evolution of a ‘Bollywood model’ of filmmaking remarkably different from Hollywood's. The paper adds to social network perspectives in evolutionary theory by suggesting that, given certain social network structures, policy regulation and other environmental factors may be instrumental for industry evolution.

South Asian Popular Culture

Parul Bhandari

This brief essay explains the nuances and complexities of Indian elites’ subjectivities, which need to be understood beyond the simplistic frameworks of access to capital. This is done through the analysis of two recent Bollywood movies—Dil Dhadakne Do and Shaandaar—that depict the myriad struggles, vulnerabilities and strategies of the elites in forming marriage alliances.

Faryal Jogezai

Southeast Asian Review of English

Sonia Ghalian

In recent times, the study of film stardom has grown exponentially, emerging as a field that engages critically with film and popular culture. Stardom in the twenty-first century, in both Hollywood and Bollywood, is converging more than ever, directing our attention to an increasingly global audience. In the Indian context, recent scholarship has looked at film stardom from historical, sociological, and ideological perspectives.....

ForwardPress

Neeraj Bunkar

Most films directed or produced by upper-caste cineastes presented the wretched and dejected world of the subaltern, while films, although few, by anti-caste filmmakers vehemently and powerfully put forward the idea of justice and equality

mes journal

P. A. Fazal Ghafoor

third part on the communalisation of the hindi film industry

Quarterly Review of Film and Video

James McMahon

This paper builds an empirical and theoretical model to analyze how the financial goal of risk reduction changed the insides of Hollywood’s star system. For the moviegoer looking at Hollywood cinema from the outside, the function of the star system has remained the same since the 1920s: to have recognizable actors attract large audiences to Hollywood’s biggest and most expensive productions. The composition of this system is, however, sensitive to many historical changes in the business and culture of cinema. From year to year or film to film, there is neither a stable set of movie stars, nor a timeless logic for deciding how one should cast some actors over others. So how do Hollywood insiders make these decisions? If the evolution of Hollywood’s star system is shaped by broader social factors, risk reduction would be a key factor after 1980. The financial history of Hollywood shows a systemic process of risk reduction that began in the early 1980s and continues into the present (McMahon 2013, 2019). Risk reduction was achieved by Hollywood studios making the wide-release strategy (a.k.a., saturation booking) more predictable through an aggressive implementation of the blockbuster style and the high concept standard (McMahon 2022; Wyatt 1994). This paper uses Internet Movie Database (IMDb) casting data to analyze how the star system from 1980 to 2019 was a component in this push to reduce risk. Risk reduction shapes film casting when a star system is built on controlled repetition. Repetitive casting—choosing the same people to star in a series of films—is a form of control because the repetitive selection is the inequality of opportunity by another name: if an in-group is internally repetitive when alternatives exist, an out-group is repeatedly excluded. There are two key conclusions to the analysis of the IMDb dataset. First, casting repetitiveness/inequality in the blockbuster era of Hollywood (1980–present) is low compared to Hollywood’s “classical” studio system (1930–1948). High repetitiveness/inequality during the first half of the twentieth century is consistent with existing research on the studio system; during the studio system, Hollywood had, among other strategies, a preference to cast people on multi-year contracts (Schatz 2010). Second, the historically low levels of repetitiveness/inequality after 1980 can be misleading if we ignore sector characteristics such as firm size and level of theatrical distribution. While it appears that there are fewer barriers to being cast in any American film, a long career in the upper echelons of blockbuster Hollywood is still reserved for Hollywood’s elite. Whether measured by the size of distributor or number of opening theaters in theatrical release, blockbuster cinema increasingly relies on more repetitive casting.

RELATED PAPERS

Academia Biology

Dr. Godswill Ntsomboh Ntsefong

Ydron Serach Malapitan

iram Shaheen

Artificial Organs

Jui-Sheng SUN

Journal of Advanced Transportation

Sekhar Somenahalli

Carol Southall

Revista do Centro de Estudos Portugueses

Leonardo Chioda

IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits

Gynecologic Oncology Research and Practice

peter njogu

Indian Journal of Child Health

Sridevi A Naaraayan

Infection and Immunity

araceli rodriguez santiago

Indian Journal of Clinical Anatomy and Physiology

Nikilesh Sankaran

International Journal of Business Data Communications and Networking

Vinodh Kumar P

luis santarsiero

The Journal of Infection in Developing Countries

Jackeline Cortez

2018 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy (EuroS&P)

DAVID CRUZ BARRERA

Gazdaság és Társadalom

Botond Géza Kálmán

Organisational Project Management

Mahender Rao

International Journal of Production Economics

Atidel B. Hadj-Alouane

Swiss Journal of Palaeontology

Daniel Blake

kris Vandekerkhove

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Michael Sheen is right – there is a class crisis in the arts

Professor of Cultural and Creative Industries, University of Sheffield

Senior Lecturer in Quantitative Methods, University of Sheffield

Disclosure statement

Dave O'Brien receives funding from the Arts and Humanities Research Council.

Mark Taylor receives funding from the Arts and Humanities Research Council.

University of Sheffield provides funding as a founding partner of The Conversation UK.

View all partners

The actor Michael Sheen recently complained about the lack of opportunities in film and journalism for working-class people. Writing in the New Statesman , Sheen said that the path he had taken into the film industry – as a working-class young man from South Wales – has all but disappeared. But Sheen isn’t just complaining, he is doing something about it.

He’s started a creative arts scheme for people from working-class and under-represented communities. Sadly, he is right to be concerned. The latest Office for National Statistics Labour Force Survey data , collected in the summer of 2020, suggests an ongoing class crisis in the arts. The screen industries, with which Sheen is closely associated, key roles are dominated by the middle classes. For producers and directors, 61% were middle class. In screen occupations, only 25% of the workforce is working class – the lowest proportion since this data was first collected in 2014.

Our research found that a complex blend of social inequalities, labour market failures, and outright discrimination are making these jobs so exclusive and keeping talented working-class people from making it.

Early obstacles

We know that low pay and work insecurity, the costs of education, and the importance of networks and nepotism, all influence who makes it in Britain’s screen sector. Yet there are more subtle barriers stopping working-class success.

In our research for The Arts and Humanities Research Council’s Creative Industries Policy and Evidence Centre, and our recent book Culture is Bad for You , we found class inequality starts early in the life of our cultural workers.

Access to culture, both in school and extracurricular, was important in shaping whether a job in the screen sector would be plausible as a career. Unequal access to culture in childhood also had important implications later in life. Not having the “correct” cultural references shaped working-class origin workers’ sense of confidence in the workplace. It was also part of the feeling that they were not at home in the middle-class environment of the film set, the TV studio, or the office where productions are commissioned.

While issues of unpaid work and internships have seen lots of policy , screen sector, and academic attention, these unwritten cultural rules have not. One painful, example of this came in our interviewees’ discussions about discrimination as a result of their accents.

They told us their accents would be mocked and joked about in ways that went far beyond “playful banter”. Discrimination based on accent connects directly to well-known issues of sexism and racism in the screen industry. The markers of social class, such as someone’s accent, aggravate the injuries felt by women, people of colour and disabled people, as they struggle to get in and get on in the industry.

Social barriers

Even if the financial and social network barriers to success were solved, these cultural barriers would still exist. Consciously or not, those who are well connected via school and university, and are middle-class starting points, may find new ways to exclude those who make it into places that they dominate. This is not to say that more senior people working in cultural jobs actively seek to reinforce these inequalities, but what they say is often at odds with their practice.

Recent data from the Centre for Cultural Value’s impact of COVID on the cultural sector project suggests 2020 saw huge numbers of job losses and reduced working hours in key parts of the cultural industries. While film and TV seem to be recovering from restrictions on working hours as a result of the first lockdown, music, performing and visual arts occupations saw the numbers of workers reduce by 55,000. The loss of a third of the workforce, the huge uncertainty about reopening and recovery, means the class crisis is only likely to get worse.

There is significant discussion of social mobility in relation to the government’s current “levelling up” agenda . This sits alongside changes in the media industry, with the BBC’s new focus on social mobility and Channel 4 moving to Leeds . These are starting points to address this class problem. The stories of discrimination will continue until there is a change in the culture of our cultural industries that are still comfortable excluding people because they are different from the dominant, middle-class norm.

• Representation
• Film industry

Want to write?

Write an article and join a growing community of more than 183,900 academics and researchers from 4,966 institutions.

Register now

A Biography of Nepotism

Old habits die hard

Monument to Napoleon Bonaparte and his four brothers in Ajaccio, France (Photo: Alamy)

For much of history, with society functioning on the basis of kinships, nepotism was legitimate. Demands of the modern state made it a liability to be contained but even now its practice in the private sphere is a fuzzy ethical question

IF NEPOTISM, at its heart, is essentially a question of equity, then who can be more aware of it that someone enlightened in the full sense of the word; who through rigorous introspection is said to have become aware of all laws governing one’s inner self and outside. The Buddha himself. And yet, what is his own record on this front? He made the first novice, a category called trainee monk in the Sangha, his own son Rahula. And this was years after the establishment of the order, so it is not as if other deserving teenagers couldn’t have been offered this first. It is a little like starting a new division in a company just so that the proprietor’s son could get trained. Rahula would also go on to become one of the 10 principal disciples of the Buddha. Who also is the Buddha’s personal secretary, who was like a shadow along with him in his vast journeys? Ananda, his cousin. Who was another leader of the Sangha before turning apostate? Devadatta, another cousin. Who is the first woman allowed to enter the Sangha and lead the nunnery? Mahapajapati Gotami, Buddha’s stepmother. All this is more interesting if you consider that the Buddha’s venture into self-discovery began by leaving his family. As an enlightened person leading an organisation, he seemed quite comfortable in again making contact and then peopling them into high posts. Should we then conclude that enlightenment led him to nepotism? But that is being facetious. It wasn’t a thought that crossed his mind because nepotism was fundamental to the stability and growth of social organisations for most of history.

In tribal societies, before kingdoms came into being, members were connected solely by lineages. Those from a common bloodline could be depended on to not kill each other if they met on a road. Security, survival and growth were entirely dependent on kinship. Even when kinship societies developed into republics or monarchical states, reliance on family remained the mainstay. The prime example of this in ancient history is the greatest empire the world ever saw—the Romans. They were governed initially by a group called Patricians, comprising of blue-blood families. Young men still had to show their mettle but they all came from a common pool of elites. For instance, in the career marked out for such youths, there would be an initial long tenure in the army under the mentorship of a general who was associated with the family. After leaving the army, the man found a career in politics, where the same family ties welcomed him. All the political offices were reserved. When the larger common population of Rome began to rebel against such privileges, they got their Plebian representatives. But it was also tied to families in that class now. Very gifted politicians with no family background often gate-crashed the group, like the famous orator Cicero, a lawyer who went on to reach the highest office possible in Rome then. But who also accompanied Cicero in this journey to power? His younger brother who managed a high political career on the back of Cicero’s genius. Usually, people who broke through the moats of nepotism then (and possibly even now) were not out to upend the system—just become a part of it.

Over time, societies created institutions that sought to prevent nepotism, but often with limited success. Like the Catholic Church, which stepped into the vacuum left behind by the collapse of the western Roman Empire. Priests, from the Popes downwards, were forbidden from marrying and having children. This, one would think, would be a pretty good check against nepotism. But then, the pull of the family can manifest in other ways. For more than 500 years, starting with the beginning of the previous millennium, the Church saw a phenomenon termed ‘Cardinal-Nephew’ in which the Pope would appoint his relatives as Cardinals. In The Pope Encyclopedia , Matthew Bunson writes about it thus: ‘The custom that flourished, especially during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, by which a pope would name as his chief minister and most important advisor a nephew or similar relative who was elevated to the rank of cardinal and thereafter oversaw many of the most vital elements of papal administration. The practice was not invented in the sixteenth century, as papal nepotism had long been an established part of the pontifical court.’ Many nephews were predictably incompetent and corrupt but a few did manage to earn their stripes. He adds: ‘While the cardinals were often immature and at times quite incompetent, they also had a common fondness for amassing wealth and patronizing artists and architects. Thus, Scipione Borghese helped discover the genius of Bernini and built the immense and grandiose Villa Borghese near Rome. The most remarkable of the cardinal nephews was St Charles Borromeo (1538-1584), one of the foremost saints of the age and a brilliant reformer of the Church.’

Gifted politicians with no family background often gate-crashed, like Cicero. But who accompanied Cicero in this journey to power? His younger brother who managed a high political career on the back of Cicero’s genius

The biggest testament to nepotism in history is the monarchy. The crown is inevitably passed on to children—even if they are little babies—as a matter of right. And with a divine imprimatur too, because kings got their right to rule directly from the heavens, and this transmitted by blood. As if god himself gave sanction to such nepotism and every family member was a part of the cabal that held absolute power over everyone in the land. This might have been a feature of political evolution, but if you want a recent and famous example of a commoner turned king by pure merit who then wholeheartedly embraced nepotism, there is Napoleon. He began life as a soldier. Military and political genius made him dictator of France at a young age. He then decided it was time to become emperor and got divine sanction for it through the Catholic Church. Under him, France conquered large swathes of Europe and a lot of it was simply handed over to his brothers. In Napoleon: A Life , biographer Andrew Roberts wrote about his nepotism in these extracts: ‘In January 1806 Napoleon made his first really significant error of statesmanship, when he offered his brother Joseph the throne of Naples, saying: ‘It will become, like Italy, Switzerland, Holland and the three kingdoms of Germany, my federal states, or, truly, the French Empire.’ Joseph was crowned king on March 30, and Louis (Napoleon’s younger brother) became king of Holland in June. This reversion to the pre-revolutionary system of governance struck at the meritocratic system for which Napoleon had initially stood, installed largely inadequate brothers in key positions and stoked up problems for the future. In December 1805 Napoleon was writing to Joseph of Jérôme (another younger brother): ‘My very positive intention is to let him go to prison for debt if his allowance isn’t enough…It’s inconceivable what this young man costs me for causing nothing but inconvenience, and being useless to my system.’ Yet within two years he had made the utterly unchanged Jérôme king of Westphalia.’

NAPOLEON WANTED to establish a dynasty but would regret his nepotism. His brother made a mess of Spain. Jerome, put in charge of an army during the Russian invasion, failed to prevent a Russian withdrawal because of incompetence. A decisive victory was lost and the ensuing campaign would destroy Napoleon’s reign. Roberts writes: ‘Napoleon was to spend an inordinate amount of time complaining about his brothers, and would even joke of one, ‘It’s really unfortunate he’s not illegitimate’, but he kept them on long after their failures were clear…Napoleon felt he could trust his siblings more than others outside his family— although that was not borne out by events—and he wished to ape the dynastic aggrandizement of the Habsburgs, Romanovs and Hanoverians. ‘My brothers have done me a great deal of harm,’ Napoleon admitted years later in a characteristic bout of honest self-evaluation, but by then it was far too late.’

For more than 500 years, the church saw a phenomenon termed ‘cardinal-nephew’ in which the Pope would appoint his relatives as cardinals. One of these cardinals, Scipione Borghese, helped discover the genius of the sculptor Bernini

This is a fundamental issue with nepotism—it can come at a steep price. In a meritocracy, people have to work for years to establish their ability. Nepotism bypasses that and leaves it to luck whether the appointment will work out. The Mughal Empire was at its peak during Aurangzeb’s reign and then its power vanished as if it had all been hollow because the sons and grandsons who came after him were incompetent. Otherwise, who would have a problem with nepotism if it did the job? The small subset of those bypassed might be sore but the larger community would have no quibble with it so long as their interests were protected. But that is rarely how it pans out. Because nepotism’s risk was clear, there were enjoinments to keep a check on it. In Arthashastra, Kautilya warns against favouritism in appointments even if he also says people appointed should be from good families, which seems like one of those ethical dilemmas only reserved for present times. The Chinese, thousands of years ago, first came out with a system of examinations to appoint bureaucrats by merit and root out nepotism.

What finally made nepotism bad in both principle and law was the emergence of the modern nation-state that had been forced to shed all vestiges of tribal societies. The very scale and organisation of the state demands that it not be managed by a close network of relatives. The state also cannot be not modern because of competition from neighbours around who are on the same political journey. The price of incompetence could very well mean being swallowed up. A defining character of the modern state became what political scientist Francis Fukuyama calls ‘impersonal institutions’. In The Origins of Political Order, he writes: ‘Once states come into being, kinship becomes an obstacle to political development, since it threatens to return political relationships to the small-scale, personal ties of tribal societies. It is therefore not enough merely to develop a state; the state must avoid retribalization or what I label repatrimonialization.’

The Mughal Empire was at its peak during Aurangzeb’s reign. Then its power vanished because the sons and grandsons who came after him were incompetent. Who would have a problem with nepotism if it did the jobs?

When nepotism is identified as wrong in the public sphere, it is natural to extend the argument to the private sphere. But here it enters a fuzzy area. A country is owned by everyone and so everyone has an equal right to its positions. But if it is a private business, why should the owner be answerable to anyone except himself? Bollywood is put up as an exemplar of nepotism but what exactly is wrong is not spelt out beyond the fact that outsiders don’t get opportunities. But why does it become the responsibility of the insiders to give it? If Karan Johar, as is accused, only gives opportunities to star kids and keeps the flag of nepotism going, then he also takes the loss if any of his movies fails. Meanwhile, the film industry is replete with examples at all levels, from superstars to spot boys, who create their own space despite being outsiders. The late Sushant Singh Rajput, whose death triggered off the latest debate, is now portrayed as a victim of nepotism. But he is in fact an example of the opposite, someone who came in from the outside without any connections and made it as a big star. Also consider how ironic it can get when the standards of nepotism are applied in the private sphere. The actress Kangana Ranaut has been one of the most outspoken about nepotism in Bollywood. Ranaut’s manager is her elder sister. From the standpoint of the community of managers of actors, or those who aspire to be managers, what does that look like?

About The Auth o r

More st o ries.

Equally Ever After

Murder in Burdwan

A Proverbial Guide to the Polls

M o st popular, restoring the sun god in kashmir.

Amit Majmudar

The Last of Them

India’s twin dividends.

Minhaz Merchant

The Assault of the Caveat

S Prasannarajan

More C o lumns

Equally Ever After Sharanya Manivannan

Murder in Burdwan Rajiv Bhatia

A Proverbial Guide to the Polls MJ Akbar

REC O MMENDED STORIES

Guarding the Citadel

Madhavankutty Pillai Union Minister Piyush Goyal sways north Mumbai, a traditional BJP bastion, reports

A Measure of Mumbai

Lhendup G Bhutia How India’s financial capital votes has an outsized influence on national politics. Modi leaves nothing to chance

PR Ramesh Why certain surnames are no longer an asset in indian politics

© 2019 Open Media Network Pvt. Ltd.

Design & Developed by Pixelvj

The UK's film industry is a nepotistic 'closed shop' run by an 'old boys' network

The UK film industry has a distinct lack of diversity thanks in part to the prominence of nepotism and an "old boy" networks, according to a new report.

An audit of the industry, carried out for the British Film Institute (BFI) by research and consultancy firm the Work Foundation, found that only 3% of employees are from a minority or ethnic background, compared to 12.5% nationally. Only one in five key production workers are women, with an average gender pay gap of £3,000. The disability pay gap is even worse, at £8,450.

The biggest problem currently facing the industry is the lack of diversity, respondents said. Common barriers to jobs include not knowing the right people and geographical issues.

"Narrow recruitment channels" have created a "closed shop," the report said, while the dominance of freelancers and unpaid interns stopped people without financial flexibility getting into the industry.

Related stories

"The industry is dominated by Oxbridge, who all know each other and go back decades," said one respondent.

"There's also a lot of nepotism in the industry... Recruitment is via word of mouth and they always look to hire people they know are good and gave worked with previously," said another.

Both employers and workers also highlighted the lack of relevant education and training available, saying that courses often did not adequately prepare individuals for work, and that career advice was frequently either poor or unavailable.

The UK film sector employs 66,000 people, the majority of whom are based in London and the South East. According to the report, the industry is a large net contributor to the Treasury and is experiencing a period of rapid growth that outstrips every other sector.

Watch: Why ‘Die Hard’ is definitely a Christmas movie

• Main content

• TRP for UPSC Personality Test
• Interview Mentorship Programme – 2023
• Daily News & Analysis
• Daily Current Affairs Quiz
• Baba’s Explainer
• Dedicated TLP Portal
• 60 Day – Rapid Revision (RaRe) Series – 2024
• English Magazines
• Hindi Magazines
• Yojana & Kurukshetra Gist
• PT20 – Prelims Test Series
• Gurukul Foundation
• Gurukul Advanced – Launching Soon
• Prelims Exclusive Programme (PEP)
• Prelims Test Series (AIPTS)
• Integrated Learning Program (ILP) – 2025
• Connect to Conquer(C2C) 2024
• TLP Plus – 2024
• TLP Connect – 2024
• Public Administration FC – 2024
• Anthropology Foundation Course
• Anthropology Optional Test Series
• Sociology Foundation Course – 2024
• Sociology Test Series – 2023
• Geography Optional Foundation Course
• Geography Optional Test Series – Coming Soon!
• PSIR Foundation Course
• PSIR Test Series – Coming Soon
• ‘Mission ಸಂಕಲ್ಪ’ – Prelims Crash Course
• CTI (COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR) Test Series & Video Classes
• Monthly Magazine

Sociological Analysis of Nepotism

• October 15, 2020

UPSC Articles

SOCIETY/ ETHICS

Topic: General Studies 1,4: Indian Society Ethics and Human Interface: Essence, determinants and consequences of Ethics in-human actions; 

Context : Sushant Singh Rajput Case and the issue of Nepotism in Bollywood

What is Nepotism?

• Nepotism is favoritism that is granted to relatives in various fields, including business, politics, entertainment, sports, religion and other activities. 
• In simple words, Nepotism is favoritism based on kinship
• The term originated with the assignment of nephews to important positions by Catholic popes and bishops

Consequences of Nepotism

• Unfair Competition : Those with family connections don’t face the same level of competition as outsiders, exactly as domestic companies face much less competition when there are import barriers. 
• Imposes Individual and wider social cost: Breaking in is much harder for an outsider and those who have the talent may never get the opportunity to showcase it. Therefore, there is a loss of potential output or value to society because of the resulting misallocation of talent.
• Inefficiency: There is comprehensive evidence that family firms are often beset by inefficiency, with bad management affecting the productivity of the entire organisation. 
• Hinders Productivity: There are further indirect negative effects of nepotism on efficiency. If it is known that rewards depend on connections and not on effort and initiative, it would divert people’s efforts away from productive work to networking and lobbying.

Why aren’t there some corrective forces at work that would chip away at the inefficiencies of nepotism?

There are two main reasons why this may not happen.

First, there are often explicit barriers to competition.  

• This barrier gives incumbent groups monopoly power and enables inefficient practices such as nepotism to flourish. 
• Monopolies, syndicates and cartels; 
• Social institutions such as the caste system and patriarchy; 
• Policies that prevent the inflow of workers, goods and services from outside, such as anti-immigration laws and protectionism. 
• Here, potential competitors are explicitly excluded and, therefore, insiders get undue advantage because of restricted competition
• Because of restricted competition, there is a loss to society from lack of access to the best technologies, products, skills and services.
• Challenges of Subjectivity
• Second, a less open and subtle channel of nepotism has to do with the fact that in certain domains, it is not easy to come up with an objective measure of quality. 
• The ordinary consumer can separate the good from the bad and the marketplace would tend to weed out the bad. 
• But for many professions, quality or performance is not that visible or cannot be readily and independently verified.
• In the case of research, for example, evaluation of quality is based on peer-review. By their very nature, these opinions are based on information and judgement that outsiders cannot hold up to scrutiny. 
• Therefore, to the extent the opinions of experts, referrals, reputation, endorsements, and networks are necessary to certify quality in any field, they become a potential breeding ground for nepotism.

Way Forward

• Nepotism is just one of the symptoms of a much of broader issue — the lack of mobility.
• Mobility can be enhanced when people are made aware of such discrimination exiting in the society. Education with right set of values can help increase this awareness & thus strive towards curbing Nepotism

For a dedicated peer group, Motivation & Quick updates, Join our official telegram channel – https://t.me/IASbabaOfficialAccount

Subscribe to our YouTube Channel HERE to watch Explainer Videos, Strategy Sessions, Toppers Talks & many more…

Related Posts :

Simultaneous blasting for zojila tunnel, day 5 – q 1. the essence of ethics of an action lies in its consequences. critically comment. .

• DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS IAS | UPSC Prelims and Mains Exam –21st May 2024
• [MOCK TEST] Sameeksha 2024 – IASbaba’s All India Mock Test for UPSC Prelims 2024 on 2nd June (SUNDAY). Available in Offline & Online Mode (English & हिन्दी)
• UPSC Quiz – 2024 : IASbaba’s Daily Current Affairs Quiz 21st May 2024
• DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS IAS | UPSC Prelims and Mains Exam –20th May 2024
• UPSC Quiz – 2024 : IASbaba’s Daily Current Affairs Quiz 20th May 2024
• DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS IAS | UPSC Prelims and Mains Exam –18th May 2024
• UPSC Quiz – 2024 : IASbaba’s Daily Current Affairs Quiz 18th May 2024
• [Admissions Start] Baba’s GURUKUL FOUNDATION Classroom Programme for Freshers’ – UPSC/IAS 2025 – Above & Beyond Regular Coaching – OFFLINE and ONLINE. Starts 6th June
• DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS IAS | UPSC Prelims and Mains Exam –17th May 2024
• UPSC Quiz – 2024 : IASbaba’s Daily Current Affairs Quiz 17th May 2024

Don’t lose out on any important Post and Update. Learn everyday with Experts!!

Email Address

Search now.....

Sign up to receive regular updates.

Sign Up Now !

De-normalizing nepotism in the film industry.

The person in question, a crew member in the entertainment industry, had allegedly experienced a situation where a Production Coordinator (referred to as MS) offered increased pay for an additional shoot time. However, the Line Producer (referred to as AV) allegedly denied approving the increased pay, even though the person in question had an email from the Line Producer confirming the agreement.

To add to the issue, the Line Producer apparently allegedly decided to cut everyone’s pay because the shoot wrapped earlier than expected, and the agreed-upon rate of $150/12 (which was already $50 less than the minimum wage for NYC Production Assistants) was not being respected.

The person in question was frustrated and felt that their rights as crew members were being violated. They had worked the additional shoot time based on the confirmation from the Production Coordinator and the Line Producer’s email. The unexpected cut in pay and failure to honor the agreed-upon rate added to their grievances.

The person in question was determined to seek a resolution for the alleged non-payment issue and the breach of the agreement. They planned to take appropriate steps, such as consulting with a union or seeking legal advice, to ensure that their rights and fair compensation were respected. They also wanted to raise awareness about such practices in the entertainment industry and encourage others to stand up for their rights and fair treatment in the workplace.

Feedback and Corrections If you are a person mentioned in this article and would like to discuss its contents or add information, please feel free to  contact us .

Leave a comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Receive updates on companies and individuals allegedly involved in misconduct, and contribute anonymously to the cause of creating a safer and more ethical film environment.

TED is supported by ads and partners 00:00

Nepotism and Bollywood

• entertainment

• Entrepreneurship
• The Career Coach
• Behind The Scenes

A deep dive into nepotism in Bollywood

• Posted 3 January, 2023

New York Magazine’s viral essay on Hollywood’s nepo baby boom has generated many thoughts and opinions on actors with famous parents. But there’s another realm of entertainment where nepotism is always at the forefront of conversations.

Nate Jones’ anchor essay on nepo babies sparked conversations about star kids and their many advantages in the entertainment industry.

But this conversation has always been happening in India about the Bollywood industry.

“Many people don’t know that Bollywood is also almost as old as Hollywood,” says Snigdha Sur, founder of South-Asian publication The Juggernaut and self-proclaimed Bollywood encyclopaedia.

Also known as Hindi cinema, Bollywood tends to have what’s called the “founding families of Bollywood”.

After the partition of Greater India, many families moved to Bombay because it felt more of a cosmopolitan city, and many of these families went into the film industry. And because the film industry was seen as salacious and looked down upon, many of these families ended up providing a lot of the talent.

One founding family includes the Kapoor family , with over 93 years in the Hindi film industry and at least four generations currently in the family business.

The patriarch Prithviraj Kapoor had six children, including influential filmmaker and actor Raj Kapoor, who had kids like actor Rishi Kapoor, whose son is currently one of Bollywood’s highest-paid actors, Ranbir Kapoor.

“The Kapoor family is one of the biggest families in Bollywood to this day where you could probably name as many as 10-12 people somehow related to, or married into this family that’s still working in Bollywood as actors, producers, writers, filmmakers,” says Snigdha.

It’s because of families like this that you mainly hear the same names like Kapoor, Khan and Mukherjee.

“That has basically been one of the hallmarks of Bollywood as a film industry,” says Snigdha.

And while the many founding families are thriving in Hindi cinema, some actors are known as the “outsiders” who aren’t descended from founding families but sometimes do make it onto the big screen.

Outsiders include Shah Rukh Khan, Ayushmann Khurrana, Deepika Padukone and her husband, Ranvir Singh. And while these actors are currently some of the biggest names in Hollywood cinema, many have expressed their need to work harder and feel excluded.

“You know what, some of the outsiders are even bigger than that,” says Snigdha.

In the first episode of the seventh season of Indian talk show Koffee With Karan, hosted by filmmaker Yash Johar’s son Karan, Ranvir Singh was a guest with Mahesh Bhatt’s daughter Alia, who is also married to Ranbir Kapoor. The actor made a subtle dig at Karan for having a bias for nepo babies and having to work harder as an outsider after he was seen favouring Aliaa in the show’s game segment.

When she asked Deepika Padukone if she felt the need to work harder as a non-nepo-baby, Snigdha said she said yes. But the actress revealed that she doesn’t let it get to her and just has to accept that she needs to work ten times harder to make it into the industry.

Related articles

David Hockney’s new exhibition is a celebration of art’s future

How Tory Lanez case demonstrates Hollywood’s misogyny

“I think there’s that kind of feeling that you just have to work harder in this industry because no one’s going to give you a break on your own,” says Snigdha. “You just have to be perfect and think about the people who are still lasting, like Shah Rukh Khan or Deepika.

“They had to give multiple, multiple, hits many times over to maintain position as the top stars.”

Not only that, many actors have expressed the struggles of being an outsider and not having many opportunities because of nepotism.

Non-nepo-baby Siddhant Chaturvedi summarised it by saying, “their struggle begins where our dreams are fulfilled”, after shutting down Chunky Panday’s daughter’s rant on being a nepo baby.

Kiriti Sanon and Taapsee Pannu revealed they lost roles due to their lack of credibility and being replaced by a nepo baby “a few times”. Ayushmann Khurrana also mentioned that if he were a star kid, his acting debut would have begun if he was 22 than at 27.

Many outsiders also feel plagued by their title by constantly being reminded of it.

“All the nepo babies are friends and grew up going to the same parties,” says Snigdha. “So maybe they’re dismissive because they frankly aren’t usually open to adding someone outside their usual circle unless they’ve already established themselves.”

And Karan Johar does have a history of favouring nepo babies over their outsider counterparts – especially with those he brings onto his show.

“So much of any creative industry, or the entertainment industry, is too reliant on network in India, as opposed to basically meritocratic channels, says Snigdha. “It feels like it’s much more about the network you have, whether you have a lucky break, whether you somehow know the casting director, whether you somehow had dinner with the right director and the direct connection.

And if an aspiring actor or filmmaker doesn’t have the right connections or the backing of their famous relatives, Snigdha fears they might not even bother with their ambitions.

“I think it’d be really sad if this kind of behaviour leads to people who are professionals, who want to go to drama school, to not even pursue that,” says Snigdha. “I’d really fear of the pathways to star power as a profession decline.

“You don’t want to prevent a future talent who just might be out there, who might be a fantastic actor, who might be a fantastic filmmaker from even trying.”

Many think the exclusion and the favouritism might have caused the death of an outsider actor.

In June 2020, Sushant Singh Rajput died by suicide, and like any celebrity’s death, conspiracy theories began circulating. Many blamed nepotism and related malpractices in Bollywood for his passing.

A day after the actor’s death, Indian actress and filmmaker Kangana Ranaut blamed the media for writing negative stories about him and the industry for not acknowledging his talents because he was an outsider.

A case was filed against nepo babies Karan Johar, Sanjay Leela Bhansali, Salman Khan, Ekta Kapoor and four others by a lawyer, Sudhir Kumar Ojha, alleging that Rajput was denied opportunities because of nepotism, leading to his suicide.

But, while the case was dismissed, it didn’t stop fans of the late actor from bullying Johar and Bhatt on social media, especially when the latter spoke dismissively of Sushant in another episode of Koffee with Karan.

Rumours were also circulating that Sushant was banned by major production houses in Bollywood and his movie, “Paani”, getting shelved because of a fallout with the movie’s filmmaker Aditya Chopra, who was allegedly supported by Karan Johar, which might’ve left the actor alienated in the industry.

“I think nepotism was at the forefront, with him [Sushant Singh Rajput] specifically, because he was definitely one of the bastions of that ‘outsiderism’,” says Snigdha. “He often talked about , very vocally, about feeling like an outsider, by feeling like working harder and things like that.

“He was one of the few people to broach the subject and talk about it.”

But there’s one thing Snigdha says people forget when talking about the actor’s death.

“I don’t think a lot of people in the industry are ready to talk about mental health ,” says Snigdha. “In this conversation, we’re missing out on the fact that there were real mental health issues.

“It’s so much easier to just make it about one thing, it’s about many things actually, his death represented many, many things.

“His death got politicised ,” she says. “So much of what happened after was that his death became this political stand-in for people to put in the story they wanted to tell.

While we might never truly know what happened to Sushant, it’s important to try to solve the core problems in the industry.

“If the goal is to tell amazing stories and to really reflect the diversity of India, then the goal should really be how to get diverse actors, diverse filmmakers, diverse writers into the industry, and that’s the bigger problem,” says Snigdha. “Just getting angry about his [Sushant’s] death is not going to solve that problem.

“I’d love to see the industry take action on all of those points, which is how we source just more and more diverse viewpoints, and I don’t know if that’s happening rapidly enough.”

While star kids and knowing the right people will “100% will always be prevalent in Bollywood”, some outsiders do become, and still are, some of the biggest names in Bollywood. And Snigdha hopes the industry will be more open to non-nepo-babies.

“I’d love to see more diverse talent out there,” says Snigdha. “We should really do that in Bollywood because we’re a very old industry, and we’re going to have to continue persisting.

“I’d love to see who the future Shah Rukh Khan is.”

I’m Anam (She/Her), a journalist and Remote Writer at Thred. Born and bred in London, I studied journalism for my Bachelors. I’ve written everything from pieces about veganism to sex education and skincare – my goal at Thred is to write about issues that affect society and what’s happening beyond the borders of London.

Opinion – Drake and Kendrick’s feud is a lose-lose for women

‘Women-only’ exhibit challenges gender discrimination charges

Opinion – FKA Twigs proves AI can empower artists

Keep up with thred by signing up to our planet-positive newsletter, more from thred..

Both rappers have weaponized feminism and demonised women in an effort to one-up each other.  It was the feud heard around the world. By now, you’ll know that Drake and Kendrick Lamar are far from friendly . After years of alleged hostility, both singers have released searing diss tracks that seem to have united a divided world; we can’t help but micro-analyse every lyric. But it’s not all popcorn and streams. Watching...

‘Ladies Lounge’ has taken a creative approach to deterring unwanted male visitors.  Tasmania’s Museum of Old and New Art (Mona) raised eyebrows when it launched an exhibition open only to women. Titled ‘ Ladies Lounge ’, the exhibit features works by American artist Kirsh Kaechele, and is designed as a commentary on misogynistic borders in the art world and beyond. However, the show was abruptly closed in April last year, when Sydney resident...

The singer has proposed an AI version of herself to balance her workload. The response has been mixed, but Twigs nods to an empowering future.  FKA Twigs has been known to blur creativity with technology . Her ethereal music, films, and dance routines – alongside art and fashion ventures – have always pushed the boundaries and cemented her position within popular culture. Despite reaching global levels of fame, Twigs has never relinquished her...

Netflix’s undisclosed AI use sparks debate on media manipulation

Netflix has come under fire for including undisclosed AI imagery in a new true crime documentary. The backlash has sparked important conversations around media manipulation.  Like it, fear it, or loathe it, AI is now a part of our everyday lives. From education to entertainment, artificial intelligence is only set to keep growing, shaping nearly every aspect of our interaction with the media. But these changes call for boundaries. Both AI’s...

Thred Newsletter!

Sign up to our planet-positive newsletter

Never see this message again.