This is one of the most absurd, artificial controversies yet. The HFPA was founded in the 1940's as an association of foreign journalists covering the U.S. film industry. The membership qualifications were that members had to (1) work for a foreign publication, (2) cover the Hollywood beat, and (3) live in southern California so that they could come to meetings. It's always been small. I imagine it's still a rather clubby, ingrown group. It may be rotten to the core in 101 Hollywoodish ways. But it's not racially discriminatory. It has had black members in the past. If there aren't any now, it's because none have applied to join. This does not especially surprise me. Its membership will reflect the foreign publications that find it worth their while to maintain a Hollywood bureau. I would imagine that these are mostly publications in countries with large and sophisticated film industries of their own, with both a professional film community and a large, knowledgable viewership base eager to follow the industry globally. If Africa has not yet developed a robust indigenous film industry, that is not the HFPA's fault. If there are no major publications with international bureaus covering the film industry in Lagos, Kinshasa, Nairobi, or Addis Ababa, that is not the HFPA's fault.
There is no particular reason why a German, Italian, Indian, Japanese or Korean publication should be expected to hire a black reporter to cover Hollywood, just so the HFPA can meet an arbitrary quota. I know, I know; the reigning idiots believe if something moves, it becomes white man's burden to piggyback a black quota across the finish line. The world is to be reengineered as a sheltered workshop for black people. Enough.
“The world is to be reengineered as a sheltered workshop for black people. Enough.”
Thank you. Very helpful post.