Barriers to Diversity in Film – A Research Review – Aug 07

different perceptions of inequality and discrimination, the chances of
wide-ranging acceptance of monitoring by white professionals and
managers charged with carrying this out must remain highly
questionable.
Furthermore the conceptual basis of monitoring is flawed. As I have
argued elsewhere (Bhavnani 2001) critics suggest that the concept of
ethnic monitoring does not allow for comparisons across class and
‘race’ or across ‘race’ and gender, to allow for an understanding of
comparative performance of outcomes. This leads to poor conceptual
clarity underlying the efforts to change outcomes, particularly since
‘race’ is seen to be an independent variable separated from other
structural inequalities in society.
Monitoring is used within organisations as record keeping, without
taking action on what these statistics might mean for action. Why
should we decide that ethnicity or disability, for example, is a singular
identity, which is important in all situations? Most importantly we
should not carry out monitoring as a matter of habit, without
understanding why we are doing it. What is the issue we are trying to
tackle? Should we count? How? Who should we count and why? The
purpose of monitoring should be thought through carefully.
C:\Documents and Settings\mcorless\Desktop\Intranet\Barriers to Diversity in Film_DS_RB 20 Aug
07.doc
176