On-screen representation of a number of Australian communities remains “critically low” in local TV drama productions compared to population benchmarks, a new diversity report from Screen Australia has found.
The report, released Friday, assessed the diversity of main characters across 361 Australian dramas on TV and online, broadcast since the peak body’s last diversity report in 2016, up until 2021.
Over that period, the number of First Nations peoples appearing on-screen saw a “strong” increase to 7.2% from the 4.8% seen in 2016, while representation of people living with disabilities rose to 6.6% from 3.6%.
“This result shows good progress, and it’s not by accident — it represents years of advocacy and consistent hard work to ensure our practitioners feel supported and are afforded opportunities in an industry that hasn’t always been accessible,” said Angela Bates, head of First Nations at Screen Australia.
Representation of the LGBTQIA+ community, meanwhile, rose to 7.4% from 4.5%, while people of non-European descent saw the largest increase in on-screen representation, with an increase to 16%, up from 6.9%.
Even still, Screen Australia says more needs to be done to ensure local productions are more reflective of the Australian population.
According to the report, one in four TV dramas features all Anglo-Celtic main characters, down from the last report where the number was one in three.
While the largest increase outlined in the study was “non-European”, which more than doubled over five years, cultural groups that make up large parts of the Australian population are still persistently underrepresented.
People from southern and central Asian backgrounds, for instance, made up 7% of the Australian population in 2021, but just 2.8% of the characters seen in local TV dramas on-screen.
North-east Asian and South East Asian groups saw similar under-representation, while southern and Eastern European groups — commonly made up of Italian and Greek communities across Australia — and people from north-west European groups accounted for the most under-represented groups on-screen.
For people living with disabilities, TV representation over the five years to 2021 saw improvements as well, “but from a low base”. Disability remains “very much under-represented” in Australian TV drama, where representation was up to 6.6% in 2021 compared to the 3.6% seen in 2016.
The report found that nearly three-quarters of all programs did not feature any disabled main characters, a minor improvement on the 90% seen in the previous report, while close to one in five Australians live with a disability.
Screen Australia CEO Graeme Mason said while the report notes progress, it remains sluggish.
“It’s great to see improvements since 2016, however, these results show that the overall pace of progress is slow and there is a long way to go to reach genuine representation of Australia’s diverse communities on-screen,” Mason said.
“It’s vital that Australian screen stories authentically reflect the diversity of our nation, and we know that the screen industry is becoming more aware of the cultural and commercial value of creating diverse content.”
Compared with other markets, the results shake out favourably. Australia’s representation of First Nations peoples and women compared to international peers offers cause for optimism, while the under-representation of people with disabilities emerges as a global trend.
The report said international findings indicate the need for more representation of people of colour, “particularly Latino, Asian and Pacific Islander communities”, while representation of Black people on-screen has reached parity with population benchmarks in the US and UK.
Screen Australia said it will look to other markets, where campaigns and summits, along with legislation — as seen with Canada’s Streaming Act and the UK’s Equality Act — and even tax incentives are being leveraged to diversify on-screen representation.
“While our on-screen results compare favourably with some of our peers on several metrics — such as our strong First Nations and women’s on-screen representation — other jurisdictions are ahead of the game in terms of taking action and implementing whole-of-sector strategies,” Mason said.
“We can learn from these countries as we look at ways to pick up the pace of change in our local industry.”
Maybe the fact that almost half of people with a disability are over 65 accounts for their lack of representation. Older people (specially women) get very few roles.
They obviously don’t watch the ABC.
Interesting how Anglo-Irish cohorts of Howard’s Australia are now down to 54% of the population, even lower in cities, yet media, politics and corporate life are still…. dominated by WASPs and some others in the cohort?
No wonder some outsiders, who see related media, perceive that there is still a white Australia policy running or presume we’re predominantly WASP?
Is it Anglo-Celtic, or European? This report seems unsure, but many in the latter category aren’t in the former.
Given that the term ‘anglo‘ derives from the Danemark and ‘celtic‘ was a meaningless & vague neologism from the daze of 17thC gentlemen ethnographers trying to distinguish between Romans and barbarians, it might be preferable, as a pointless descriptor,to stick with Saxon.
Oops…
The point is, migrants from UK and Ireland constituted the overwhelming majority of the population up to WW2. Other Europeans tend to be from more recent migrations, so it is good to distinguish.
You do realise, don’t you, that ‘discriminate‘ & ‘distinguish‘ are synonyms which is a statuatory crime in multikulti/softpap world?
On the rare occasions that I see a TV, in the seconds it takes from ON to get off FTA, the faces, clothing & mien one can’t avoid seeing are not representative of any known society, at lest on this particular planet. (Perhaps preurban Akkad, who knows?)
The non-euroid ones are even less diverse.
Th
And what about the other non Anglo cohorts such as the Welsh and Scots, please do not call them Anglos.