AMPAS has been busy these past ten years or so dealing with rapid cultural changes and political pressure as well as, let's be honest, fallout from their own various blindspots. Though I know I pissed off many people back in the day when I argued that the Academy was taking more of the blame for #OscarsSoWhite than they perhaps deserved (in that they can only vote on the movies that are made), people who pushed back had a solid point: the Academy is the face and reputation of the American film industry. So even though the Academy isn't an organization that makes movies, their success as the symbolic representation of THE MOVIE INDUSTRY means they are culpable. Starting with the smart diversity initiatives set in place by Cheryl Boone Isaacs's terms as AMPAS president, they've made significant strides at being more inclusive. Today the Academy took a much more specific step forward. They've set up rules of representation and inclusion in order to be Oscar eligible in the first place starting with the 96th Oscars (2023 film year / 2024 ceremony).
You can read the whole press release at their official site but it boils down to this...
Basically you need to pass two of the four following standards to be deemed eligible for Best Picture consideration. To simplify the following summary, please note that "underrepresented group" does not only refer to racial diversity though there is some fine print that focuses specifically on that within these standards. The term can refer to any of the following four groups: women, the LGBTQ community, disabled people, and people of color. Basically the Academy is asking Hollywood to hire more than just straight white abled men. That's a reasonable request!
✅ ONSCREEN REPRESENTATION
Your onscreen ensemble has to be diverse. They Academy is asking that 30% of the ensemble -- "ensemble" refers to everyone onscreen basically, not just the stars, so it's a much wider thing than SAG's idea of an ensemble -- be from at least two underrepresented groups. You can also pass this one if the storyline is about an underrepresented group so if your story is about women or disabled people or LGBTQ community, it qualifies here even if there isn't racial diversity. (The 30% number is likely inspired by census statistics )
✅ CREATIVE LEADERSHIP
A couple of department heads (all those crafts we love to obsess over!) or creative leadership positions (Director/Producers/Writers) have to go to a member of an underrepresented group. The entire crew itself has to be diverse in basically the same percentage way that the cast has to be (see above).
✅ INDUSTRY ACCESS AND OPPORTUNITIES
This one is very low profile i.e. we probably won't hear about it at all (unless people aren't happy) as it involves paid internships and crew training that focus on underrepresented groups
✅ AUDIENCE DEVELOPMENT
This involves the marketing and publicity and distribution teams. The studio or film company has to have multiple in-house senior executives from an underrepresented group.
We haven't yet read any online reactions before typing this but we assume that people on both sides of the fence (racists and woke alike) will complain about this for opposite reasons (too strict! / not strict enough!) because it's very hard to please anyone let alone everyone. But The Film Experience applauds the Academy for making the effort and for specific goals. It's hard to reach vague goals!
And these groupings above are really not asking for too much. It will probably make people in positions of power at studios as well as filmmakers themselves think a little more carefully about how they operate at work and who they work with which is not a bad thing.
It's not restrictive at all, really, even for storytellers who prize their creative freedom (and which storytellers don't?). Consider that even if you wanted to make a chamber piece masterpiece like a Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? or an all-male period war picture about soldiers or POWs like a Grand Illusion or a white family drama, like say, August Osage County. Would you suddenly not be eligible for Best Picture? No, you still would probably be eligible! Because you only have to meet half of the requirements above.
Most movies won't have trouble meeting these criteria (as long as they're hiring smartly) and it only applies to Best Picture. For Best International Feature, for example, it's not required so it won't be an unfair standard for countries with less diversity than the US (and that's a lot of European, Scandinavian, and Slavic countries). Croatia, for example, is 99% white (no, really!) and they're still going to be able to submit their contender each year for Best International Film.
Again, it's really not asking for too much. And it's a smart move on the Academy's part to demand it since, as we've already long since learned, they will always be blamed for what individual filmmakers and large studios are doing, so why not be a lobbyist for positive change which is essentially what this amounts to?