CONCLUSION

Diversity is not the same as representation

There is a difference between how participants understood ‘diversity’ and ‘representation’:

• • • Diversity refers to the total number and proportion of Black, Indigenous and People of Colour characters on screen (e.g., does the content include Black, Indigenous, and People of colour characters?).
  • • Representation focuses on accuracy (does the content represent real life or a series of stereotypes, assumptions) and authenticity (multi-dimensionality of characters and stories, resonance with audiences’ lived experiences).
  • • For example, ‘diversity’ looks at the proportion of Black actors on screen but might not consider whether these are primary or secondary roles, the complexity of character development, or the extent to which their portrayal reinforces or challenges stereotypes. Whereas representation focuses on all of these aspects—quality and quantity.
  • While both diversity and representation are important, Black, Indigenous, and People of Colour audiences prioritize representation—that is, how diverse characters and stories are reflected onscreen and the authenticity of those portrayals-when considering the overall quality of content and their motivation to watch.
• • Although participants acknowledged efforts toward diversity, representation remains a problem: participants detailed both overt issues, like the reproduction of stereotypes, and more subtle problems, like the relegation of racialized characters to supportive roles, and lack of character development.

Diversity and authentic representation are fundamental

• • The authentic, representative portrayal of diverse characters and stories is a fundamental expectation of screen media that directly shapes viewing choices and behaviours among Black, Indigenous and People of Colour participants.

Current content misses the mark

• • Though improvements have been made, current entertainment content reflects a considerable lack of authentic representation among Black, Indigenous and People of Colour stories and characters.
• • A considerable portion of the current content conveys a lack of belonging, perpetuates stereotypes, and continues to harm and ‘other’ a large proportion of Canadian communities. This reality raises the stakes considerably for Black, Indigenous, and People of Colour audiences.
• • Black, Indigenous and People of Colour audience participants agree (28% strongly agree and another 40% somewhat agree) that Canada should be taking a more active role in creating content that authentically represents a diversity of racial and cultural backgrounds.

Traditional audience research is set up for bias

• • Audience research invites feedback from participants regarding what is currently on screen; current content significantly underrepresents stories, perspectives and characters who identify as Black, Indigenous and People of Colour. Accordingly, audience feedback reduces or excludes content that centres diverse perspectives, reinforcing the assumption that such content is not desirable or of primary interest.
• • Audience research methods and questions of interest were not developed for the current social or media ecosystem in which the viewing preferences of Black, Indigenous, and People of Colour audiences differ significantly from each other, and from what is often termed the “general population”. Consequently, traditional research methods can introduce systemic biases directly into the research methodology. For example, census data informs panel composition, which means that while the proportion of Black, Indigenous, and People of Colour participants on a panel might align with the census, these perspectives are lost when aggregated into broader ‘general population’ categories that report according to gender, language, and location. Pre-established panels are shaped by their original purpose, which can lead to an overrepresentation of particular demographics. For example, many incentivized panels have a high composition of people who are not working.
• • Audience research populations dominated by white or non-racialized participants fail to recognize gaps in authentic representation, likely because they are already well-represented onscreen. Accordingly, they may be less likely (and perhaps able) to provide feedback identifying gaps in authentic, representative content.
• • General population responses fail to capture gaps in diversity and representation. Data gathered from the general population (which tends to be dominated by white participants, since it is based on the census) indicates similar levels of dissatisfaction with diversity in entertainment content as reported by Black, Indigenous and People of Colour participants. However, when invited to clarify which kinds of currently underrepresented storylines/narratives they would like to see more of, almost 20% indicated that ‘nothing is missing’.
• • Minimally, this suggests a limitation in the general population’s understanding of current gaps in representation and authentic storytelling – such as the difference between diversity (number of people onscreen) and representation (authenticity and quality of storytelling and character portrayal). It might also shed light on the performative quality of ‘supporting diversity’ (differences between true belief and understanding versus doing what is politically correct or socially desirable).
• • Black, Indigenous and People of Colour audiences, who are better positioned and more likely to recognize and accurately identify diversity content gaps, are not disaggregated from broader audience data. Consequently, such feedback, if available (i.e., if this question is asked) risks being lost amidst broader categories of segmentation.
• • Current audience research practices are not set up to discover new and innovative insights, but to clarify how current practices should continue.

Canada’s screen media sector is dominated by ‘General Population’

• • The gaps in understanding about diversity and representation revealed in the general population audience highlight how identity and positionality in a white-dominated society can limit true understanding of diversity and representation onscreen.
• • Decision-making, producing, and creative roles in Canada’s screen media sector continue to be dominated by white, cis, often male professionals – that is, the composition of Canada’s Screen Media sector parallels the biases present in general population audience research, pointing to a significant and urgent limitation in the sector’s capacity for creating more authentic and representative content.
• • These findings underscore the need to prioritize representation of Black, Indigenous and People of Colour producers and creators at all levels of the sector, and especially in decision-making roles. Without this change, the development of truly authentic, representative content that reflects the experiences, preferences, and lives of Canadians will not be possible.