Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.

Monday, December 09, 2019 {{ new Date().getDay() }}

By Scott Collins, Los Angeles Times (TNS)

LOS ANGELES — There won’t be any need for an #EmmysSoWhite hashtag.

The 67th Emmy Awards nominations announced Thursday underscored TV’s push into diversity over the last year, with nods for minority lead actors such as Viola Davis in “How to Get Away With Murder,” Taraji P. Henson in “Empire” and Anthony Anderson in the comedy “black-ish.” A win by Davis or Henson would be the first for an African-American actress in the dramatic category. And Amazon’s “Transparent” was nominated for best comedy — an Emmy first for a show with a transgender protagonist.

In this arena, as in so many others, TV is simply reflecting the times, veterans say.

“I don’t like to say ‘diversity’ in 2015,” said John Ridley, creator of ABC’s murder mystery “American Crime,” which was developed in the wake of the Trayvon Martin killing and received 10 nominations. “I like to say ‘reality.’ Look at the stories around us … these are different types of shows, different types of perspectives.”

Even so, the nominations didn’t represent quite the coup that some observers were expecting. “Empire,” a soap opera set in the hip-hop world that turned into a major hit for Fox, had to settle for just three nominations, including Henson’s scene-stealing turn as Cookie. That was a long way from the 24 nods for HBO’s fantasy epic “Game of Thrones,” the most-nominated program of this year’s pack.

There was no mention of Terrence Howard, who plays the tortured patriarch on “Empire” — in fact, the lead dramatic actor category was entirely white, featuring repeat nominees Kyle Chandler, Jon Hamm and Kevin Spacey. And no major nods went to “Jane the Virgin” or “Fresh Off the Boat,” two other much-talked-about series that featured Latina and Asian-American lead characters respectively.

Even so, the balance generally on display throughout the roster still provided an illuminating counterpoint to, say, the Academy Awards, where the monochromatic nature of the nominees this year led to a #OscarsSoWhite hashtag. No black, Latino or Asian-American actors were nominated at the Oscars.

“Film needs to take a leaf out of the TV book especially with diversity and women starring, directing and producing,” said the British-born actor David Oyelowo, nominated for his work in the HBO movie “Nightingale.” “There is a far more representative view of what it is to be in America from TV” than from film.

After years of tokenism — minority actors traditionally relegated to “buddy” roles in shows created by and aimed at white people — television is embracing diversity amid a larger creative renaissance. Part of the reason is financial, at least for broadcasters. As affluent whites have abandoned free TV for premium outlets such as HBO and Showtime, programmers have reaped the benefits of creating shows, such as “Empire,” that reveal other sides to culture.

Much of the attention leading up to the awards will likely focus on the dramatic actress category. An African-American has never won in that category; the first to even get a nod was Debbie Allen, for “Fame” in 1982. Between Cicely Tyson’s nomination for “Sweet Justice” in 1995 and Kerry Washington’s first nod for “Scandal” in 2013, nearly two decades went by without a black actress getting a nomination.

A historic win for Washington was widely expected in 2013 and 2014, but she was edged out first by Claire Danes from Showtime’s “Homeland,” then by Julianna Margulies from CBS’ “The Good Wife.” (Margulies was not nominated this year.)

The sense of TV as a medium now embracing multiple cultures and identities has been growing for a while. Last year, “Orange Is the New Black,” Netflix’s drama that reinvented the cliched and exploitative girls-in-prison genre with biting wit and a famously diverse cast, received eight nominations, eventually winning three Emmys. (This year, after moving from comedy to drama categories because of a rule change, it’s back with four nods.)

Among the most-nominated programs was HBO’s movie “Bessie,” a biopic of the blues pioneer Bessie Smith that earned 12 nods, including one for star Queen Latifah.

Some of the nominees say that there’s no going back.

“Audiences are demanding new stories,” said veteran character actor Andre Braugher, nominated for his work on the Fox comedy “Brooklyn Nine-Nine.”

TV is “always going to be less representative than the general population,” he added. “It moves at a glacial pace. But it continues to move.”

(Times staff writers Meredith Blake, Tre’Vell Anderson, Yvonne Villarreal and Steve Zeitchik contributed to this report.)

Photo: Anthony Anderson, right, who plays a father in ABC’s “black-ish,” is nominated for Outstanding Lead Actor in a Comedy Series. After years of criticism that the award show focused too much on white shows and actors, this year’s crop is notable for its racial diversity. (Bob D’Amico/ABC/TNS)

President Trump and former Vice President Biden at first 2020 presidential debate

Screenshot from C-Span YouTube

Reprinted with permission from DailyKos

Donald Trump is claiming that he will still debate despite the rule change that will cut off the candidates' microphones while their opponent delivers his initial two-minute response to each of the debate's topics. But everything else Trump and his campaign are saying sounds like they're laying the groundwork to back out.

"I will participate," Trump told reporters Monday night. "But it's very unfair that they changed the topics and it's very unfair that again we have an anchor who's totally biased." At his Arizona rally Monday, Trump attacked moderator Kristen Welker as a "radical Democrat" and claimed she had "deleted her entire account," which is false. Trump's campaign manager, Bill Stepien, went further in his whining about the debate.

Stepien touted a letter to the Commission on Presidential Debates as "Our letter to the BDC (Biden Debate Commission)." That letter came before the CPD announced that it would mute microphones for portions of the debate in response to Trump's constant interruptions at the first debate, though Stepien knew such a decision was likely coming, writing, "It is our understanding from media reports that you will soon be holding an internal meeting to discuss other possible rule changes, such as granting an unnamed person the ability to shut off a candidate's microphone. It is completely unacceptable for anyone to wield such power, and a decision to proceed with that change amounts to turning further editorial control of the debate over to the Commission which has already demonstrated its partiality to Biden."

Shooooot, here I thought it was generous to Trump that the microphones will only be cut to give each candidate two uninterrupted minutes, leaving Trump the remainder of each 15-minute debate segment to interrupt.

But what did Stepien mean by "other possible rule changes," you ask? What was the first rule change? Well, it wasn't one. Stepien wrote to strongly complain that "We write with great concern over the announced topics for what was always billed as the 'Foreign Policy Debate' in the series of events agreed to by both the Trump campaign and the Biden campaign many months ago." Welker's announced topics include "Fighting COVID-19, American families, Race in America, Climate Change, National Security, and Leadership," Stepien complained, using this as a launching pad to attack Biden on foreign policy.

Except this debate was never billed as a foreign policy debate. It's true that in past years, the third debate has sometimes focused on foreign policy, but here in 2020, the CPD's original announcement of debate formats and moderators said of the third debate, "The format for the debate will be identical to the first presidential debate," and the first debate "will be divided into six segments of approximately 15 minutes each on major topics to be selected by the moderator."

So even before the CPD finalized the decision to prevent Trump from interrupting for two minutes in each of six segments, so 12 minutes out of a 90-minute debate, Team Trump was falsely complaining that the debate was rigged. No wonder—as a Biden campaign spokesman noted, the Trump campaign is upset "because Donald Trump is afraid to face more questions about his disastrous Covid response."

Trump has lost one debate and backed out of one debate. If he goes into this one with the attitude he's showing now—attacking the moderator, attacking the topics, enraged that he can't interrupt for two entire minutes at a time—he's going to lose this one, badly, once again hurting his already weak reelection prospects. So which will it be? Back out and have that be the story, or alienate one of the largest audiences of the entire presidential campaign by showing what kind of person he is?