We just spent the last several years hearing how representation matters, and when the numbers flip sufficiently that a new group is now under represented they get told "that's too bad".
When you look at where money is spent and by whom, keep it in mind as you shift the demographics of who's watching / reading. The money moves with the groups interest, and it doesn't necessarily get filled by the new demographic.
>When you look at where money is spent and by whom, keep it in mind as you shift the demographics of who's watching / reading. The money moves with the groups interest, and it doesn't necessarily get filled by the new demographic.
I'm not clear on what exactly you mean. My best guess is: "media is produced to satisfy an audience's desires" but I'm not even confident that's what you mean.
Media is not produced to satisfy an audience's desires; that's only indirectly and coincidental; more and more.
Media is produced to satisfy an executive's desire, which is often based on what they think the audience wants, but sometimes is based on what they think the audience should want.
Media is rarely passive and never just follows where consumers point to, is it. Eveeybody with some power has some agenda to push on others.
I dont even mean cia/military-backed ultra patriotic movies from hollywood of the past, eveeybody simply has their opninion and even journalism is rarely objective.
Representation never mattered, what mattered was to get a different group on top. It's not just men vs women, you see it everywhere. It's like how a poster of black and Asian people is "diverse".
When you look at where money is spent and by whom, keep it in mind as you shift the demographics of who's watching / reading. The money moves with the groups interest, and it doesn't necessarily get filled by the new demographic.