AJ, all I said is that they were excluding blacks by choice or they were not......your dichotomy comment regarding direct or indirect exclusion is about the application of exclusionism......nothing to do with my observation.

Yay! 'Asians and Hispanics' have been added to the list for special Oscars.

What about Hobbits? How many Hobbits win Oscars? Discrimination!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmM6kN1NM8k

While on the subject,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNYJNI7HSsA

A hobbit can't get an Oscar. It's a fictional
character. Oscars are given to real people
according to the rules of the Academy, in
various categories be they -
actors, directors, composers, and so on.
It's an Academy Award of Merit. Be they white, black,
Asian, or Hispanic.

Here’s what you said, sonofgloin…

<<Well the academy either sat down and decided to exclude blacks, or they made their decision based on whatever merit factors they use.>>

This leaves room for only two possibilities: ‘direct racism’ or ‘no racism at all’. Which is a false dichotomy.

I don't know what you're waffling on about when you speak of the "application of exclusionism".

OK AJ, no more waffle about semantics.......cheers.

I can't get enthusiastic about this. A bunch of insincere overpaid plastic people backslapping each other, and saying what a fantastic job they are doing, before they all go off to some extravagant after party to snort cocaine and bonk each others partners.
The majority of Hollywood movies are rubbish, and deserve the dustbin award. I do believe it wasn't until Tony Curtis demanded that Sidney Poitier be given equal star billing with himself in 'The Defiant Ones' 1958 that a black actor had got to star, until then they were given co-star or less.
In the 1930's a baby Shirley Temple was given top rating over Bill "Bojangles" Robinson in movies. she was white, he was black. ST couldn't act, but looked cute as American apple pie, Robinson could dance a storm but was the wrong colour.