August 19, 2024 • 31 mins
Do you remember the first time you saw yourself truly represented on the screen? Today on the Bright Side, we’re talking with Madeline Di Nonno – the president and CEO of the Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media – to unpack some of the mind-blowing studies the institute has done about women’s representation in TV and film and the possibility that we discover when we challenge long-held stereotypes.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
Hello Sunshine, Hey fam Today, on the Bride Side, we're
asking the question when was the first time you saw
yourself truly represented on the screen. The President and the
CEO of the Geena Davis Institute, Madeline Dunono, is here
and we're unpacking some of the mind blowing studies the
Institute has done, like have you ever noticed how one
dimensional TV moms are. We'll also talk about how just
(00:25):
seeing a female president on TV actually shifts voter attitudes
off screen. It's Monday, August nineteenth.
Speaker 2 (00:32):
I'm Simone Boyce, I'm Danielle Robe and this is the
Bride Side from Hello Sunshine, a daily show where we
come together to share women's stories, to laugh, learn and
brighten your day. Simon, Happy Monday, Happy Monday. Let's kick
things off with on My Mind Monday. It's our opportunity
to share stories that motivate us, inspire curiosity, provide a
(00:56):
fresh perspective for the week ahead.
Speaker 3 (00:57):
You know, oh yeah, I'm so here this what's on
your mind today?
Speaker 1 (01:02):
Well, it's a bit of a source object. Why. I'm
going to start with a tough question.
Speaker 3 (01:06):
Okay, okay, you know I love a question.
Speaker 1 (01:08):
Give it to me. How many times do you think
you've let your emotions run wild at work?
Speaker 3 (01:16):
At work.
Speaker 2 (01:18):
Over the course of the last eleven years, I'd say
probably like four that I regret.
Speaker 1 (01:25):
Yeah, I think that's accurate for me too. I ask
because I recently came across this article on Business Insider
that's all about the benefits of learning how to control
your emotions at work. It's this side of personal development
that's not often talked about. Yea, and it's causing me
to ask myself, Okay, what would my career look like
if I managed my emotions better? So this piece is
(01:47):
written by a former sales director, a turned life coach
and advice columnist named Susie Moore, and in the piece,
more lays out the ways that we can manage our
emotions when we're faced with disappointment in our careers. And
one of the things that points out is that quote
business is simply a blend of math and emotions. She says,
money is easier to understand than our emotions. And emotions
(02:09):
are the messy part.
Speaker 2 (02:10):
Ooh, emotions are the messy part, but they're also the evidence.
They're the signals that we need to read into.
Speaker 1 (02:19):
I think, yeah, they're there. For a reason. I think
we need to listen to them. I think it's also
about learning to manage them and learning to control them
and channel them in the proper way in a business setting. Yeah,
so hear me out. So in this article, she explained
how she manages the most common business frustrations, like the
sting of rejection. For example, she says that her bounce
(02:39):
back rate after a rejection has gone up from two
days to just one to two minutes, which is pretty impressive. Interesting,
and she says she's able to do that by understanding
that rejection is inevitable and we should embrace it, we
should learn from it and use it to our advantage.
This kind of reminds me of the conversation that we
had with Jamie kern Lima, Like she talks about how
she received so many no's in the course of trying
(03:02):
to pitch her business right, and she learned to just
like let it bounce off of her.
Speaker 3 (03:07):
Yeah, the bounce back rate is important. I agree with that.
Speaker 2 (03:11):
And there's like a whole category of therapy called somatics
where people kind of teach you to breathe through things,
and they say you can breathe through emotions in like
ninety seconds.
Speaker 1 (03:20):
That's really impressive. My bounce back rate, I think is
twenty four hours. I usually add, I give myself twenty
four hours to sit with the sting of rejection and
then I'm like, you got to move on. How about you?
What do you think your bounce back rate is?
Speaker 2 (03:33):
It depends what the rejection is. If it hits a
childhood wound, it probably takes a little longer. Like the
last time I had a guy break up with me,
it didn't take twenty four hours. It took me like
two years. But in terms of work stuff, I totally agree.
I think twenty four hours is a great rule.
Speaker 1 (03:50):
Okay, So the next one that Susie mentions is super important,
and this is something that I think a lot of
women facing their careers is pretty universal, which is how
to manage internetroal and negativity on the Internet. This is
particularly relevant for people who are in public facing careers, influencers,
creators online and She said that she used to feel
like an insensitive remark online would leave her crushed, but
(04:13):
she learned to not ticket personally. She says, when you
can understand that the only thing a mean remark can
do is make you sad for a few minutes, it
loses its power and its luster, and kind of in
the same way that she advises us to anticipate rejection
that it's inevitable, she also advises here that we start
to expect these kinds of negative comments instead of fearing them.
(04:33):
Do you think that'll work? Yeah?
Speaker 3 (04:35):
I do like this.
Speaker 2 (04:36):
I mean Hillary Clinton always says you take criticism seriously
and not personally, and I really like that quote.
Speaker 3 (04:44):
I also think you have to consider the source. Where
is it coming from.
Speaker 1 (04:48):
Yes, yes, Is it coming from the inner circle or
is it coming from people who don't actually know me
or what I want.
Speaker 3 (04:55):
I've heard people talk about how no one that is.
Speaker 2 (05:00):
Like doing less or trying less than you are is
ever criticizing, because if you're trying, you know how hard
it is to freaking try.
Speaker 1 (05:08):
Here's how she wraps up the article. I think this
is really powerful, she says, quote, when we realize our
emotions are most often in the way of sound decision
making and forward strides, we see how in control we
actually are.
Speaker 2 (05:21):
I really like this, and I feel like it's important
not to discard our emotions, but to recognize them, synthesize them,
and then act accordingly beautifully said.
Speaker 1 (05:34):
You know, this article brought up some interesting points about
how we face disappointment in our careers. And today we
have a special guest who is at the helm of
an organization dedicated to inclusive representation in film, TV, advertising,
who I had the pleasure of interviewing recently.
Speaker 3 (05:51):
I'm so excited to hear this one.
Speaker 2 (05:53):
I wasn't here because I was out of town for work.
I stayed in this little airbnb and and I got
my butt back to the bright side.
Speaker 3 (06:03):
And I'm really excited to learn more about this one.
Speaker 1 (06:05):
I think you're gonna like this one. My colleague and friend,
Madeline Ganono is the president and CEO of the Gena
Davis Institute on Gender in Media. If you haven't heard
of it, it is a research based organization that champions
equitable representation in media. It was founded by actor and
activists Gena Davis of League of their Own Beetlejuice, Thelma
(06:27):
and Louise Fame, and she founded it in two thousand
and four because she was stunned by the lack of
female characters and diversity on screen. And we've made so
many strides, but it was really interesting to talk to
Madeline about where we still have room for improvement. The
mission of the Institute is to change the world, one
story at a time, and they do that via data
(06:47):
driven research and providing insights and tools to help leading
content creators and movie studios do better in terms of
inclusive content. Madeline is going to drop some truly eye
opening facts about representation and TV and film, how we
can be the change as consumers, Like what is our
role in all of this, and the possibility that we
(07:08):
discover when we challenge these long held stereotypes. It's all
really fascinating and I can't wait for y' all to
hear it.
Speaker 3 (07:14):
I can't wait to hear it along with you.
Speaker 1 (07:16):
So after the break, I'm getting into it all with
Madeline Dino. Stay with us, Madeline, Welcome to the bright Side.
I'm so thrilled to be here. I am so thrilled
to see you. I'm so thrilled to be sitting across
(07:39):
this table from you. I can remember the first time
that I really understood the importance of representation. It was
nineteen ninety seven and the Cinderella movie with Brandy and
Whitney Houston had just come out, and I was probably
about nine years old at the time, and my mom,
who's a black actor. She doesn't act anymore, but she
(08:01):
did for many years. She made the premiere of this
movie sound like such a big deal, and to be honest,
I didn't really understand why. I was like, cool, Okay,
it's a Disney princess, It's Cinderella, Whitney Houston, love Whitney Houston.
This is really exciting. So I finally asked her, like,
why is this such a big deal to you? And
(08:21):
I realized that she was in tears at that point,
and she said that she had never seen a black
Disney princess before, and for her as an actor to
see that representation, I think it just brought up like
this well of emotions, you know, a lot of complex emotions.
And that's what I want to talk to you about
today is the why behind all of this, the impact.
(08:44):
So how does fictional media shape reality when it comes
to how women are perceived in society.
Speaker 4 (08:51):
What happens in the world to make believe has real
world impact. And we've actually seen that with some of
our studies that we've done in surveys. So for example,
going all the way back to when Gina played one
of the first female presidents on TV in Commander in Chief.
The Taylor Kaplin Group did a poll and basically a
(09:13):
seventy six percent of the population at that time was
familiar with the show, and fifty eight percent surveyed said
they would take a female candidate more seriously because they
saw Gina in that role nineteen times. And that number
went up to sixty nine percent when it came to
adults thirty five to forty four. And it was completely
(09:34):
bipartisan in terms of the survey. So that's just one
tiny example of the power of media to influence our culture.
Speaker 1 (09:43):
Wow, that can't be underestimated, especially right now in a
year like this. So I want to get into how
the Gena Davis Institute really came to be. Obviously, we
all know Geena Davis for her work and TV and
film dozens of credits, Thelman, Louise I mean, so many
beloved projects. She said that she was actually inspired to
(10:03):
start the institute after and experience watching a movie with
her daughter. Would you share that story and how it
underscores the work that you do today? Absolutely.
Speaker 4 (10:12):
First of all, Gina had a heightened awareness of how
women and girls would feel based on the roles, the
iconic roles. Even today, people still walk up to her
and say, I played baseball because of you from Alegi
their own. So imagine now you're a new mom, and
of course you're going to start watching content with your kid.
(10:32):
And her daughter was two at the time, and it
immediately struck Gina the disparity in not seeing female characters
in anything she was showing her daughter, and it was
so surprising to her that she started asking her friends, hey,
did you notice that there just wasn't a lot of
female characters, And her friends were like, Nope, didn't notice.
(10:53):
And then when she'd go on meetings for potential acting
jobs and projects, she would bring up the same thing
and they'd be like no, they said, no, that we
have that fix that's so important to us. And they
named one female character in the entirety of a movie
to think that they had gender equality fix because they
had one female character. So it was really about unconscious
(11:16):
bias and people not realizing it until Gena pointed it
out and obviously use the data to prove her point.
Speaker 2 (11:24):
Well.
Speaker 1 (11:24):
In addition to your mission of ending unconscious bias and
fostering inclusion in global media. There's one other thing that
you say a lot at the GENA. Davis Institute and Foundation,
and that is if you can see it, you can
be it. This idea that there is power and representation.
As the President and CEO of the GENA. Davis Foundation,
you know the film and TV landscape better than just
(11:45):
about anyone. So broad strokes tell us where are we
today when it comes to positive representation and media.
Speaker 4 (11:53):
When it comes to there's different verticals that we look at,
global advertising, global TV, global film, global gaming, and our
Refrierer Children's Television report first, so there's kind of good
news and bad news. When it comes to programming that
children are watching. We're pretty much so at parody. When
(12:13):
it comes to new programming, the default is still a
little bit more male. What's very interesting is when you
look at animation, when you have a more human like
animated character, we're at gender parody. But when it's a
talking trade or a mushroom, the default is male. Yeah,
(12:34):
so there's just some disparity there. But I will say positively,
the best progress that we have seen when it is
when it comes to people of color. In terms of leads,
we saw it was like fifty three percent of the
leads on TV that kids are watching or people of color.
We've seen that in advertising. We've seen that in the
(12:58):
portrayal of women in STEM where a number of years
ago it was only.
Speaker 1 (13:02):
Twenty nine percent.
Speaker 4 (13:04):
Now it went up to forty two percent in our
latest studies. So we're really really happy when you think
about people of color being forty one percent of the
population in the US, that that is starting to show
up on screen.
Speaker 1 (13:17):
The name GENA. Davis Institute is so well respected in
this industry, but I imagine it must have been hard
to gain credibility or to go out and really pursue
this mission and get people on board. What was the
experience like getting it from the concept to becoming this
leader in research?
Speaker 4 (13:35):
It really goes back to Gina's vision and her approach
and operating dynamics. So first of all, it was about
the data, and data has been the key to her access.
It's not our opinion, it's the data. And when you
approach people who are running billion dollar entities and you
approach them with the facts, they look at data all
(13:58):
day long. So number one, Number two, we're in the industry,
and it was really about being presented in a colleisial way.
We see the industry as partners and we know they
want to do good things. We're providing with the tools
and resources, so we never had a carrot and stick approach.
We never shame and blame, and we've always been more
(14:20):
of a B to B so a business to business
versus targeting consumers, and all of that together has been
the key to our success.
Speaker 1 (14:30):
I want to drill down into the data with you
because the data are truly remarkable. One study looked at
the representation of families, specifically how scripted TV moms are represented.
So here are some of the highlights from that research.
Eight out of ten moms were slender, seventy percent of
moms take on the domestic tasks. If there is a
clear breadwinner, nine out of ten times it's a dad.
(14:52):
And this last one threw me for a loop. Less
than one in ten TV parents had a messy house.
How unrealistic is that? Will you talk about the impact
of these unrealistic standards on women.
Speaker 4 (15:05):
It's shocking because it is the twenty first century, But
we found out that for the most part, TV moms
today are still mostly white, they're young, they're thin, they're
not disabled, they're not career et cetera, et cetera, and
that was really surprising. We've always looked at the intersection
of gender and race and lgbtqia and disability, et cetera.
(15:28):
The body diversity came up a number of years ago
because in looking at the population, over forty percent of
our population is of a larger body type, and so
body diversity became very, very important for us, and it's
something that we've been including in our data for a
(15:50):
number of years across global advertising, global TV, like all
of our studies, because not everybody's a size zero and
there's a lot of discriminate. So, for example, we have
found that characters that are of a larger body type
are the brunt of the joke. They're always seen as
(16:10):
you know, eating or out of breath, and just terrible,
terrible stereotypes.
Speaker 1 (16:15):
I want to talk about female directors. We had Stephanie
Allen and Tick Nataro on our show recently to talk
about a film they co directed called am I Okay.
In just a few weeks, we have Zoe Kravitz making
her directorial debut with Blink Twice, Scarlett Johansson getting behind
the Helm with Eleanor the Great. But I was shocked
to see that in the ninety six year history of
(16:36):
the Academy Awards, just nine women have ever been nominated
for Best Directors since nineteen twenty eight, and a woman
has only won three times. I mean, this makes me
think of the whole controversy around Greta Gerwig not being
nominated for Barbie last year. Why is this number still
so low?
Speaker 4 (16:53):
One thing is the pipeline, and there are many other
wonderful organizations that study what's happening behind the camera. We
don't really focus behind the camera. But first of all,
it's a pipeline problem. So if, for example, it's a
three to one five to one ratio of male directors
to female directors, it's about the opportunity. And we know
(17:16):
that female directors don't have the same opportunities and access
to capital and that pathway to getting their films made.
Most female directors can get say one film made, even
if they max out their credit cards, but to get
that second and that third film made is very, very challenging.
So it's really important that female directors can find their
(17:38):
way into the pipeline in order for us to have
more female directed movies, and when you look at independent film,
you have gender parity or even more for female directors.
But we need it with these bigger budget films. So
historically female directors are relegated more to the indie that
lower production budget and that's where the pipeline needs to
(18:02):
be filled. And hopefully with a lot of the programs
that the studios have, that'll start to change. But it's
been glacial. I mean, the film industry is over one
hundred years old.
Speaker 1 (18:12):
So you have a number of tools that you use
whenever you gather this data and then you take it
out to meet with the studios to share it with them,
to share it with these decision makers who have the
potential to create real progress. Walk us through some of
those tools that you've created.
Speaker 4 (18:30):
So we have always provided kind of a benchmark for
how are we doing. And we have had the privilege
of working with Google and usc of a Tribe School
of Engineering to incorporate some machine learning, some AI along
with a lot of human expert coding, which is led
(18:51):
by doctor Meredith Conroy who leads are research and insights team.
We have wonderful PhDs in house on our team who
conduct the research. And so one of those tools is
GDIQ Gena Davis Inclusion quot and that is really a
benchmarking tool that gives us a sense of where are
we in terms of gender, race, ethnicity, LGBTQAA, age, fifty plus, disability,
(19:16):
body type, which are the six core dimensions.
Speaker 1 (19:19):
But that's after the fact.
Speaker 4 (19:22):
So one of the tools that we developed with our
partners at usc Viterbi is called spell Check for Bias,
and it's actually looking at scripts and we're breaking down
a script with a different lens. We're looking at all
the characters that are speaking and we pull them off
into a data set and then we walk it through.
(19:44):
You know, are those characters that are contributing dialogue? Are
they female, are they LGBTQA, what are they? Is there
an opportunity? And it's really about not attacking a story,
not telling the storytellers what to do, not invading their
authentic t but it's pointing out opportunities. And then we'll
also look at things like sexism, racism, and essentially we
(20:08):
provide all the backup in the data for our partners
so that if they are evaluating a script, whether it's
for green light, before it goes to casting, they have
a different lens on looking at it because most leaders
are looking at the top of the call sheet.
Speaker 1 (20:23):
They're not looking at.
Speaker 4 (20:24):
Every single person in the cast that could be contributing dialogue.
And that's a great way to organically infuse more inclusion
and diversity in a script before it gets made.
Speaker 1 (20:39):
So when you uncover that research, what happens next? How
do we implement these findings into actual change.
Speaker 4 (20:47):
So there's a cycle of change for us. So the
first thing we do is we usually socialize the data
very publicly through an event, all the social media, all
the emails, etc. The real work starts when we start
taking it out studio by studio, network by network, streamer
by streamer. We do hundreds and hundreds of meetings and presentations.
(21:12):
It could be a year or so, is a full circle,
and then we'll measure the industry again. And that's how
we're able to make change. We're able to collect whether
it's anecdotal or we'll receive direct testimonials from changes that
people have made. That's how the real work gets done.
Speaker 1 (21:30):
We need to take a quick break, but we'll be
right back with more from the president and CEO of
the Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media, Madeline Gnoo,
stay with us and we're back with Madeline Danoo. You
actually have some interesting recommendations for the creatives that you
(21:52):
meet with, and I want to discuss that more now.
One of the suggestions is to make diversity explicit on
the page. Can you give me an exam of what
that would look like? Absolutely?
Speaker 4 (22:03):
For example, if there is going to be a person
of color, what culture are they from? Do they have
a sense of agency? Do they have a job. So,
for example, we have seen a lot of stereotypes when
there is a person of color, they're relegated to, say
a service role. They're not shown as being a leader,
(22:25):
an entrepreneur. And it's those kinds of nuances that we
can provide a lot of opportunities for people to just
rethink that. And it has to be in the script
because if it's not in the script, then you're leaving
a lot up for question. And particularly when it comes
to say secondary characters, a lot of those decisions are
(22:46):
being made by say a second ad on set. They're
not being made by the in house casting people or
even a casting agency. So there's so many different touch
points on how actors wind up being in a scene
and being cast for that. So it's a matter of
looking at all of those opportunities.
Speaker 1 (23:07):
Madeline, I know you personally, and I know that you're
always out there giving talks and promoting the work that
you're doing at the Geena Davis Institute. You must meet
so many creatives at these events. I'm curious if any
of them have shared any success stories with you, or
stories of how your work has impacted their storytelling.
Speaker 4 (23:24):
So one of our Border directors, Wendy Calhoun, who's a
fabulous showrunner writer. Many years ago, she was working on
season two of Empire, and there was a discussion in
the writer's room about a venture capitalist and the character
(23:45):
was going to be male, and Wendy was very versed
in the work of the Institute. This is before she
joined her Border Directors, and she researched and found binders
full of female venture capitalists and went back into the
writer's room and pitched it. And that character was played
by Marissa Tomey for season two. So it was that simple.
(24:06):
I mean, it's a key stroke. I mean that's just
one example, but we have a lot of examples like that.
Speaker 1 (24:11):
I'm sure you do. Because the GENA. Davis Institute is
celebrating twenty years this year. Huge congratulations on that and
just all the impact that you've been a part of.
You were there, You joined the company five years after
its creation.
Speaker 4 (24:26):
That's true, Gina invited me, and I've had the privilege
of leading the organization for the last fifteen years.
Speaker 1 (24:32):
So what is the accomplishment you're most proud of there?
Speaker 4 (24:36):
I would say the data speaks for itself, knowing that
our theory of change has worked. What we saw before
the pandemic for the first time ever in the data
was being able to achieve gender parody for female lead
characters and the most watched most popular children's television programming,
(24:58):
followed by the following year achieving gender parity for female
leads in the largest grossing films out of the US,
and then also followed by achieving gender parity actually fifty
two percent for secondary characters in children's television. Now, this
was all pre pandemic, and you have to take into
consideration the impact of the strikes and the pandemic on
(25:23):
TV production, creatives, etc. You can't put these reports out
without taking the market and the situation that we're in
into account is going to take a number of years.
Speaker 1 (25:35):
It's a new normal.
Speaker 4 (25:36):
But we're just happy that even with our recent studies
and TV, we've still been able to see those parody numbers.
Speaker 1 (25:43):
Why are you optimistic about the future of film and TV?
Speaker 4 (25:47):
It's really with the response and how the industry has
not only embraced our data, but has embraced data. And
also it requires these companies be organizationally ready, no matter
how willing they are, and they have all built infrastructures
with departments with very seasoned executives whose sole job it
(26:12):
is is to look at the content through this lens.
Whereas decades ago, years ago, when we first started, you
didn't have that kind of empowerment. You didn't have those
kind of executives with those roles being empowered to review
content and to point out various things. So the structure
(26:33):
has changed and that allows for the companies to move
forward and also progress.
Speaker 1 (26:38):
What is our role as consumers and all of this.
Speaker 4 (26:42):
Well, we're all debating on what streaming services we want.
We all have a voice, and the industry pays attention
to what people say and what people post and their tiktoks,
et cetera. They watch it, and so you have a voice,
whereas decades ago you didn't. And there's also the power
(27:04):
of the wallet as well to support movies and TV
shows that you believe reflect the stories that you want
to see.
Speaker 1 (27:13):
You know that statistic that you shared at the beginning
of our conversation about just the having the image of
a female president in a TV show or a film
can greatly impact the perception of female leadership in reality.
And I think about the fact that we have Kamala
Harris running. I think about the fact that she would
be our first female president, and I'm curious how you
(27:34):
think that would shift the paradigm when it comes to
how presidents are represented on TV screens.
Speaker 4 (27:41):
I'm not going to tell the story correctly, but Gina
has a great story. One of the leaders of I
think it was Finland, they had only had a female president,
and there was a little boy who actually asked, can
boys be president? Well, because in that country? And I
know I'm mess this story up, so forgive me, uh.
Speaker 1 (28:02):
No, but we get it, you know what I mean? Yeah, So,
I mean that's the opportunity. You know. I had a
similar moment when I was watching the Olympics with my
son the other day. We had been watching a lot
of the women's events, and I didn't even really realize
that that we hadn't been watching the men's events, and
so I turned on the Olympics and it happened to
be men's swimming and he was like, Mommy, I want
(28:25):
to watch the girls. Where are the girls? I was like, yes, yes,
I did something right, Yes, you've tried him well exactly.
Is that an area that the Geena Davis Institute might
explore in the future is well.
Speaker 4 (28:38):
We have had the opportunity to do a few little
sports studies and one came out of a personal experience
from Gina. Because some of you may or may not
know that Gina uh qualified and pursued the Olympic archery team.
Speaker 1 (28:54):
Wait, I did not know this. Yes she was, yes, yes.
Speaker 4 (28:58):
So after seeing it was the Australian Olympics, she thought
archery was just so beautiful and it was so measurable,
and so she for two and a half years trained
and qualified for the Olympic trials.
Speaker 1 (29:15):
She didn't make the team, okay, but she did do
very very well.
Speaker 4 (29:18):
And what's interesting is a number of years ago her
archery coach called her and said, I was looking at
the statistics for National Association of American Archery and girls
participation in archery went up one hundred and five percent
in the year twenty twelve.
Speaker 1 (29:39):
Why two movies? Two movies? Can you name them? Yes,
Brave and Hunger Games.
Speaker 2 (29:46):
Yes.
Speaker 1 (29:47):
I remember actually covering this when I was working as
a reporter and we leaned on your insights. Yes, from
the Geena Davis Institute.
Speaker 4 (29:55):
They watched the movie they bought a bow. It was instantaneous.
So imagine after seeing all these fabulous female Team USA athletes,
You'm just thrilled to see fencing and wrestling and seeing
girls participation go up in those sports.
Speaker 1 (30:13):
There again is the real life impact of all these initiatives.
Thank you so much for coming on the bright side. Madeline,
thrilled you brought the brightness. Madeline Denono is the president
and CEO of the GENA. Davis Institute on Gender in Media.
You can check out their research on women's representation and
(30:35):
media on their website Genadavisinstitute dot org.
Speaker 3 (30:44):
That's it for today's show.
Speaker 2 (30:45):
Tomorrow, boxing World champion and actor Kaylee Reese, She's here
to talk about making history as an Indigenous actor thanks
to our partners at Airbnb. Listen and follow the bright
Side on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you
get your podcasts.
Speaker 1 (31:02):
I'm Simone Boye. You can find me at Simone Voice
on Instagram and TikTok.
Speaker 2 (31:06):
I'm Danielle Robe on Instagram and TikTok.
Speaker 3 (31:09):
That's r O b A.
Speaker 1 (31:11):
Y See you tomorrow, folks. Keep looking on the bright side.
Hello Sunshine, Hey fam Today, on the Bride Side, we're
asking the question when was the first time you saw
yourself truly represented on the screen. The President and the
CEO of the Geena Davis Institute, Madeline Dunono, is here
and we're unpacking some of the mind blowing studies the
Institute has done, like have you ever noticed how one
dimensional TV moms are. We'll also talk about how just
(00:25):
seeing a female president on TV actually shifts voter attitudes
off screen. It's Monday, August nineteenth.
Speaker 2 (00:32):
I'm Simone Boyce, I'm Danielle Robe and this is the
Bride Side from Hello Sunshine, a daily show where we
come together to share women's stories, to laugh, learn and
brighten your day. Simon, Happy Monday, Happy Monday. Let's kick
things off with on My Mind Monday. It's our opportunity
to share stories that motivate us, inspire curiosity, provide a
(00:56):
fresh perspective for the week ahead.
Speaker 3 (00:57):
You know, oh yeah, I'm so here this what's on
your mind today?
Speaker 1 (01:02):
Well, it's a bit of a source object. Why. I'm
going to start with a tough question.
Speaker 3 (01:06):
Okay, okay, you know I love a question.
Speaker 1 (01:08):
Give it to me. How many times do you think
you've let your emotions run wild at work?
Speaker 3 (01:16):
At work.
Speaker 2 (01:18):
Over the course of the last eleven years, I'd say
probably like four that I regret.
Speaker 1 (01:25):
Yeah, I think that's accurate for me too. I ask
because I recently came across this article on Business Insider
that's all about the benefits of learning how to control
your emotions at work. It's this side of personal development
that's not often talked about. Yea, and it's causing me
to ask myself, Okay, what would my career look like
if I managed my emotions better? So this piece is
(01:47):
written by a former sales director, a turned life coach
and advice columnist named Susie Moore, and in the piece,
more lays out the ways that we can manage our
emotions when we're faced with disappointment in our careers. And
one of the things that points out is that quote
business is simply a blend of math and emotions. She says,
money is easier to understand than our emotions. And emotions
(02:09):
are the messy part.
Speaker 2 (02:10):
Ooh, emotions are the messy part, but they're also the evidence.
They're the signals that we need to read into.
Speaker 1 (02:19):
I think, yeah, they're there. For a reason. I think
we need to listen to them. I think it's also
about learning to manage them and learning to control them
and channel them in the proper way in a business setting. Yeah,
so hear me out. So in this article, she explained
how she manages the most common business frustrations, like the
sting of rejection. For example, she says that her bounce
(02:39):
back rate after a rejection has gone up from two
days to just one to two minutes, which is pretty impressive. Interesting,
and she says she's able to do that by understanding
that rejection is inevitable and we should embrace it, we
should learn from it and use it to our advantage.
This kind of reminds me of the conversation that we
had with Jamie kern Lima, Like she talks about how
she received so many no's in the course of trying
(03:02):
to pitch her business right, and she learned to just
like let it bounce off of her.
Speaker 3 (03:07):
Yeah, the bounce back rate is important. I agree with that.
Speaker 2 (03:11):
And there's like a whole category of therapy called somatics
where people kind of teach you to breathe through things,
and they say you can breathe through emotions in like
ninety seconds.
Speaker 1 (03:20):
That's really impressive. My bounce back rate, I think is
twenty four hours. I usually add, I give myself twenty
four hours to sit with the sting of rejection and
then I'm like, you got to move on. How about you?
What do you think your bounce back rate is?
Speaker 2 (03:33):
It depends what the rejection is. If it hits a
childhood wound, it probably takes a little longer. Like the
last time I had a guy break up with me,
it didn't take twenty four hours. It took me like
two years. But in terms of work stuff, I totally agree.
I think twenty four hours is a great rule.
Speaker 1 (03:50):
Okay, So the next one that Susie mentions is super important,
and this is something that I think a lot of
women facing their careers is pretty universal, which is how
to manage internetroal and negativity on the Internet. This is
particularly relevant for people who are in public facing careers, influencers,
creators online and She said that she used to feel
like an insensitive remark online would leave her crushed, but
(04:13):
she learned to not ticket personally. She says, when you
can understand that the only thing a mean remark can
do is make you sad for a few minutes, it
loses its power and its luster, and kind of in
the same way that she advises us to anticipate rejection
that it's inevitable, she also advises here that we start
to expect these kinds of negative comments instead of fearing them.
(04:33):
Do you think that'll work? Yeah?
Speaker 3 (04:35):
I do like this.
Speaker 2 (04:36):
I mean Hillary Clinton always says you take criticism seriously
and not personally, and I really like that quote.
Speaker 3 (04:44):
I also think you have to consider the source. Where
is it coming from.
Speaker 1 (04:48):
Yes, yes, Is it coming from the inner circle or
is it coming from people who don't actually know me
or what I want.
Speaker 3 (04:55):
I've heard people talk about how no one that is.
Speaker 2 (05:00):
Like doing less or trying less than you are is
ever criticizing, because if you're trying, you know how hard
it is to freaking try.
Speaker 1 (05:08):
Here's how she wraps up the article. I think this
is really powerful, she says, quote, when we realize our
emotions are most often in the way of sound decision
making and forward strides, we see how in control we
actually are.
Speaker 2 (05:21):
I really like this, and I feel like it's important
not to discard our emotions, but to recognize them, synthesize them,
and then act accordingly beautifully said.
Speaker 1 (05:34):
You know, this article brought up some interesting points about
how we face disappointment in our careers. And today we
have a special guest who is at the helm of
an organization dedicated to inclusive representation in film, TV, advertising,
who I had the pleasure of interviewing recently.
Speaker 3 (05:51):
I'm so excited to hear this one.
Speaker 2 (05:53):
I wasn't here because I was out of town for work.
I stayed in this little airbnb and and I got
my butt back to the bright side.
Speaker 3 (06:03):
And I'm really excited to learn more about this one.
Speaker 1 (06:05):
I think you're gonna like this one. My colleague and friend,
Madeline Ganono is the president and CEO of the Gena
Davis Institute on Gender in Media. If you haven't heard
of it, it is a research based organization that champions
equitable representation in media. It was founded by actor and
activists Gena Davis of League of their Own Beetlejuice, Thelma
(06:27):
and Louise Fame, and she founded it in two thousand
and four because she was stunned by the lack of
female characters and diversity on screen. And we've made so
many strides, but it was really interesting to talk to
Madeline about where we still have room for improvement. The
mission of the Institute is to change the world, one
story at a time, and they do that via data
(06:47):
driven research and providing insights and tools to help leading
content creators and movie studios do better in terms of
inclusive content. Madeline is going to drop some truly eye
opening facts about representation and TV and film, how we
can be the change as consumers, Like what is our
role in all of this, and the possibility that we
(07:08):
discover when we challenge these long held stereotypes. It's all
really fascinating and I can't wait for y' all to
hear it.
Speaker 3 (07:14):
I can't wait to hear it along with you.
Speaker 1 (07:16):
So after the break, I'm getting into it all with
Madeline Dino. Stay with us, Madeline, Welcome to the bright Side.
I'm so thrilled to be here. I am so thrilled
to see you. I'm so thrilled to be sitting across
(07:39):
this table from you. I can remember the first time
that I really understood the importance of representation. It was
nineteen ninety seven and the Cinderella movie with Brandy and
Whitney Houston had just come out, and I was probably
about nine years old at the time, and my mom,
who's a black actor. She doesn't act anymore, but she
(08:01):
did for many years. She made the premiere of this
movie sound like such a big deal, and to be honest,
I didn't really understand why. I was like, cool, Okay,
it's a Disney princess, It's Cinderella, Whitney Houston, love Whitney Houston.
This is really exciting. So I finally asked her, like,
why is this such a big deal to you? And
(08:21):
I realized that she was in tears at that point,
and she said that she had never seen a black
Disney princess before, and for her as an actor to
see that representation, I think it just brought up like
this well of emotions, you know, a lot of complex emotions.
And that's what I want to talk to you about
today is the why behind all of this, the impact.
(08:44):
So how does fictional media shape reality when it comes
to how women are perceived in society.
Speaker 4 (08:51):
What happens in the world to make believe has real
world impact. And we've actually seen that with some of
our studies that we've done in surveys. So for example,
going all the way back to when Gina played one
of the first female presidents on TV in Commander in Chief.
The Taylor Kaplin Group did a poll and basically a
(09:13):
seventy six percent of the population at that time was
familiar with the show, and fifty eight percent surveyed said
they would take a female candidate more seriously because they
saw Gina in that role nineteen times. And that number
went up to sixty nine percent when it came to
adults thirty five to forty four. And it was completely
(09:34):
bipartisan in terms of the survey. So that's just one
tiny example of the power of media to influence our culture.
Speaker 1 (09:43):
Wow, that can't be underestimated, especially right now in a
year like this. So I want to get into how
the Gena Davis Institute really came to be. Obviously, we
all know Geena Davis for her work and TV and
film dozens of credits, Thelman, Louise I mean, so many
beloved projects. She said that she was actually inspired to
(10:03):
start the institute after and experience watching a movie with
her daughter. Would you share that story and how it
underscores the work that you do today? Absolutely.
Speaker 4 (10:12):
First of all, Gina had a heightened awareness of how
women and girls would feel based on the roles, the
iconic roles. Even today, people still walk up to her
and say, I played baseball because of you from Alegi
their own. So imagine now you're a new mom, and
of course you're going to start watching content with your kid.
(10:32):
And her daughter was two at the time, and it
immediately struck Gina the disparity in not seeing female characters
in anything she was showing her daughter, and it was
so surprising to her that she started asking her friends, hey,
did you notice that there just wasn't a lot of
female characters, And her friends were like, Nope, didn't notice.
(10:53):
And then when she'd go on meetings for potential acting
jobs and projects, she would bring up the same thing
and they'd be like no, they said, no, that we
have that fix that's so important to us. And they
named one female character in the entirety of a movie
to think that they had gender equality fix because they
had one female character. So it was really about unconscious
(11:16):
bias and people not realizing it until Gena pointed it
out and obviously use the data to prove her point.
Speaker 2 (11:24):
Well.
Speaker 1 (11:24):
In addition to your mission of ending unconscious bias and
fostering inclusion in global media. There's one other thing that
you say a lot at the GENA. Davis Institute and Foundation,
and that is if you can see it, you can
be it. This idea that there is power and representation.
As the President and CEO of the GENA. Davis Foundation,
you know the film and TV landscape better than just
(11:45):
about anyone. So broad strokes tell us where are we
today when it comes to positive representation and media.
Speaker 4 (11:53):
When it comes to there's different verticals that we look at,
global advertising, global TV, global film, global gaming, and our
Refrierer Children's Television report first, so there's kind of good
news and bad news. When it comes to programming that
children are watching. We're pretty much so at parody. When
(12:13):
it comes to new programming, the default is still a
little bit more male. What's very interesting is when you
look at animation, when you have a more human like
animated character, we're at gender parody. But when it's a
talking trade or a mushroom, the default is male. Yeah,
(12:34):
so there's just some disparity there. But I will say positively,
the best progress that we have seen when it is
when it comes to people of color. In terms of leads,
we saw it was like fifty three percent of the
leads on TV that kids are watching or people of color.
We've seen that in advertising. We've seen that in the
(12:58):
portrayal of women in STEM where a number of years
ago it was only.
Speaker 1 (13:02):
Twenty nine percent.
Speaker 4 (13:04):
Now it went up to forty two percent in our
latest studies. So we're really really happy when you think
about people of color being forty one percent of the
population in the US, that that is starting to show
up on screen.
Speaker 1 (13:17):
The name GENA. Davis Institute is so well respected in
this industry, but I imagine it must have been hard
to gain credibility or to go out and really pursue
this mission and get people on board. What was the
experience like getting it from the concept to becoming this
leader in research?
Speaker 4 (13:35):
It really goes back to Gina's vision and her approach
and operating dynamics. So first of all, it was about
the data, and data has been the key to her access.
It's not our opinion, it's the data. And when you
approach people who are running billion dollar entities and you
approach them with the facts, they look at data all
(13:58):
day long. So number one, Number two, we're in the industry,
and it was really about being presented in a colleisial way.
We see the industry as partners and we know they
want to do good things. We're providing with the tools
and resources, so we never had a carrot and stick approach.
We never shame and blame, and we've always been more
(14:20):
of a B to B so a business to business
versus targeting consumers, and all of that together has been
the key to our success.
Speaker 1 (14:30):
I want to drill down into the data with you
because the data are truly remarkable. One study looked at
the representation of families, specifically how scripted TV moms are represented.
So here are some of the highlights from that research.
Eight out of ten moms were slender, seventy percent of
moms take on the domestic tasks. If there is a
clear breadwinner, nine out of ten times it's a dad.
(14:52):
And this last one threw me for a loop. Less
than one in ten TV parents had a messy house.
How unrealistic is that? Will you talk about the impact
of these unrealistic standards on women.
Speaker 4 (15:05):
It's shocking because it is the twenty first century, But
we found out that for the most part, TV moms
today are still mostly white, they're young, they're thin, they're
not disabled, they're not career et cetera, et cetera, and
that was really surprising. We've always looked at the intersection
of gender and race and lgbtqia and disability, et cetera.
(15:28):
The body diversity came up a number of years ago
because in looking at the population, over forty percent of
our population is of a larger body type, and so
body diversity became very, very important for us, and it's
something that we've been including in our data for a
(15:50):
number of years across global advertising, global TV, like all
of our studies, because not everybody's a size zero and
there's a lot of discriminate. So, for example, we have
found that characters that are of a larger body type
are the brunt of the joke. They're always seen as
(16:10):
you know, eating or out of breath, and just terrible,
terrible stereotypes.
Speaker 1 (16:15):
I want to talk about female directors. We had Stephanie
Allen and Tick Nataro on our show recently to talk
about a film they co directed called am I Okay.
In just a few weeks, we have Zoe Kravitz making
her directorial debut with Blink Twice, Scarlett Johansson getting behind
the Helm with Eleanor the Great. But I was shocked
to see that in the ninety six year history of
(16:36):
the Academy Awards, just nine women have ever been nominated
for Best Directors since nineteen twenty eight, and a woman
has only won three times. I mean, this makes me
think of the whole controversy around Greta Gerwig not being
nominated for Barbie last year. Why is this number still
so low?
Speaker 4 (16:53):
One thing is the pipeline, and there are many other
wonderful organizations that study what's happening behind the camera. We
don't really focus behind the camera. But first of all,
it's a pipeline problem. So if, for example, it's a
three to one five to one ratio of male directors
to female directors, it's about the opportunity. And we know
(17:16):
that female directors don't have the same opportunities and access
to capital and that pathway to getting their films made.
Most female directors can get say one film made, even
if they max out their credit cards, but to get
that second and that third film made is very, very challenging.
So it's really important that female directors can find their
(17:38):
way into the pipeline in order for us to have
more female directed movies, and when you look at independent film,
you have gender parity or even more for female directors.
But we need it with these bigger budget films. So
historically female directors are relegated more to the indie that
lower production budget and that's where the pipeline needs to
(18:02):
be filled. And hopefully with a lot of the programs
that the studios have, that'll start to change. But it's
been glacial. I mean, the film industry is over one
hundred years old.
Speaker 1 (18:12):
So you have a number of tools that you use
whenever you gather this data and then you take it
out to meet with the studios to share it with them,
to share it with these decision makers who have the
potential to create real progress. Walk us through some of
those tools that you've created.
Speaker 4 (18:30):
So we have always provided kind of a benchmark for
how are we doing. And we have had the privilege
of working with Google and usc of a Tribe School
of Engineering to incorporate some machine learning, some AI along
with a lot of human expert coding, which is led
(18:51):
by doctor Meredith Conroy who leads are research and insights team.
We have wonderful PhDs in house on our team who
conduct the research. And so one of those tools is
GDIQ Gena Davis Inclusion quot and that is really a
benchmarking tool that gives us a sense of where are
we in terms of gender, race, ethnicity, LGBTQAA, age, fifty plus, disability,
(19:16):
body type, which are the six core dimensions.
Speaker 1 (19:19):
But that's after the fact.
Speaker 4 (19:22):
So one of the tools that we developed with our
partners at usc Viterbi is called spell Check for Bias,
and it's actually looking at scripts and we're breaking down
a script with a different lens. We're looking at all
the characters that are speaking and we pull them off
into a data set and then we walk it through.
(19:44):
You know, are those characters that are contributing dialogue? Are
they female, are they LGBTQA, what are they? Is there
an opportunity? And it's really about not attacking a story,
not telling the storytellers what to do, not invading their
authentic t but it's pointing out opportunities. And then we'll
also look at things like sexism, racism, and essentially we
(20:08):
provide all the backup in the data for our partners
so that if they are evaluating a script, whether it's
for green light, before it goes to casting, they have
a different lens on looking at it because most leaders
are looking at the top of the call sheet.
Speaker 1 (20:23):
They're not looking at.
Speaker 4 (20:24):
Every single person in the cast that could be contributing dialogue.
And that's a great way to organically infuse more inclusion
and diversity in a script before it gets made.
Speaker 1 (20:39):
So when you uncover that research, what happens next? How
do we implement these findings into actual change.
Speaker 4 (20:47):
So there's a cycle of change for us. So the
first thing we do is we usually socialize the data
very publicly through an event, all the social media, all
the emails, etc. The real work starts when we start
taking it out studio by studio, network by network, streamer
by streamer. We do hundreds and hundreds of meetings and presentations.
(21:12):
It could be a year or so, is a full circle,
and then we'll measure the industry again. And that's how
we're able to make change. We're able to collect whether
it's anecdotal or we'll receive direct testimonials from changes that
people have made. That's how the real work gets done.
Speaker 1 (21:30):
We need to take a quick break, but we'll be
right back with more from the president and CEO of
the Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media, Madeline Gnoo,
stay with us and we're back with Madeline Danoo. You
actually have some interesting recommendations for the creatives that you
(21:52):
meet with, and I want to discuss that more now.
One of the suggestions is to make diversity explicit on
the page. Can you give me an exam of what
that would look like? Absolutely?
Speaker 4 (22:03):
For example, if there is going to be a person
of color, what culture are they from? Do they have
a sense of agency? Do they have a job. So,
for example, we have seen a lot of stereotypes when
there is a person of color, they're relegated to, say
a service role. They're not shown as being a leader,
(22:25):
an entrepreneur. And it's those kinds of nuances that we
can provide a lot of opportunities for people to just
rethink that. And it has to be in the script
because if it's not in the script, then you're leaving
a lot up for question. And particularly when it comes
to say secondary characters, a lot of those decisions are
(22:46):
being made by say a second ad on set. They're
not being made by the in house casting people or
even a casting agency. So there's so many different touch
points on how actors wind up being in a scene
and being cast for that. So it's a matter of
looking at all of those opportunities.
Speaker 1 (23:07):
Madeline, I know you personally, and I know that you're
always out there giving talks and promoting the work that
you're doing at the Geena Davis Institute. You must meet
so many creatives at these events. I'm curious if any
of them have shared any success stories with you, or
stories of how your work has impacted their storytelling.
Speaker 4 (23:24):
So one of our Border directors, Wendy Calhoun, who's a
fabulous showrunner writer. Many years ago, she was working on
season two of Empire, and there was a discussion in
the writer's room about a venture capitalist and the character
(23:45):
was going to be male, and Wendy was very versed
in the work of the Institute. This is before she
joined her Border Directors, and she researched and found binders
full of female venture capitalists and went back into the
writer's room and pitched it. And that character was played
by Marissa Tomey for season two. So it was that simple.
(24:06):
I mean, it's a key stroke. I mean that's just
one example, but we have a lot of examples like that.
Speaker 1 (24:11):
I'm sure you do. Because the GENA. Davis Institute is
celebrating twenty years this year. Huge congratulations on that and
just all the impact that you've been a part of.
You were there, You joined the company five years after
its creation.
Speaker 4 (24:26):
That's true, Gina invited me, and I've had the privilege
of leading the organization for the last fifteen years.
Speaker 1 (24:32):
So what is the accomplishment you're most proud of there?
Speaker 4 (24:36):
I would say the data speaks for itself, knowing that
our theory of change has worked. What we saw before
the pandemic for the first time ever in the data
was being able to achieve gender parody for female lead
characters and the most watched most popular children's television programming,
(24:58):
followed by the following year achieving gender parity for female
leads in the largest grossing films out of the US,
and then also followed by achieving gender parity actually fifty
two percent for secondary characters in children's television. Now, this
was all pre pandemic, and you have to take into
consideration the impact of the strikes and the pandemic on
(25:23):
TV production, creatives, etc. You can't put these reports out
without taking the market and the situation that we're in
into account is going to take a number of years.
Speaker 1 (25:35):
It's a new normal.
Speaker 4 (25:36):
But we're just happy that even with our recent studies
and TV, we've still been able to see those parody numbers.
Speaker 1 (25:43):
Why are you optimistic about the future of film and TV?
Speaker 4 (25:47):
It's really with the response and how the industry has
not only embraced our data, but has embraced data. And
also it requires these companies be organizationally ready, no matter
how willing they are, and they have all built infrastructures
with departments with very seasoned executives whose sole job it
(26:12):
is is to look at the content through this lens.
Whereas decades ago, years ago, when we first started, you
didn't have that kind of empowerment. You didn't have those
kind of executives with those roles being empowered to review
content and to point out various things. So the structure
(26:33):
has changed and that allows for the companies to move
forward and also progress.
Speaker 1 (26:38):
What is our role as consumers and all of this.
Speaker 4 (26:42):
Well, we're all debating on what streaming services we want.
We all have a voice, and the industry pays attention
to what people say and what people post and their tiktoks,
et cetera. They watch it, and so you have a voice,
whereas decades ago you didn't. And there's also the power
(27:04):
of the wallet as well to support movies and TV
shows that you believe reflect the stories that you want
to see.
Speaker 1 (27:13):
You know that statistic that you shared at the beginning
of our conversation about just the having the image of
a female president in a TV show or a film
can greatly impact the perception of female leadership in reality.
And I think about the fact that we have Kamala
Harris running. I think about the fact that she would
be our first female president, and I'm curious how you
(27:34):
think that would shift the paradigm when it comes to
how presidents are represented on TV screens.
Speaker 4 (27:41):
I'm not going to tell the story correctly, but Gina
has a great story. One of the leaders of I
think it was Finland, they had only had a female president,
and there was a little boy who actually asked, can
boys be president? Well, because in that country? And I
know I'm mess this story up, so forgive me, uh.
Speaker 1 (28:02):
No, but we get it, you know what I mean? Yeah, So,
I mean that's the opportunity. You know. I had a
similar moment when I was watching the Olympics with my
son the other day. We had been watching a lot
of the women's events, and I didn't even really realize
that that we hadn't been watching the men's events, and
so I turned on the Olympics and it happened to
be men's swimming and he was like, Mommy, I want
(28:25):
to watch the girls. Where are the girls? I was like, yes, yes,
I did something right, Yes, you've tried him well exactly.
Is that an area that the Geena Davis Institute might
explore in the future is well.
Speaker 4 (28:38):
We have had the opportunity to do a few little
sports studies and one came out of a personal experience
from Gina. Because some of you may or may not
know that Gina uh qualified and pursued the Olympic archery team.
Speaker 1 (28:54):
Wait, I did not know this. Yes she was, yes, yes.
Speaker 4 (28:58):
So after seeing it was the Australian Olympics, she thought
archery was just so beautiful and it was so measurable,
and so she for two and a half years trained
and qualified for the Olympic trials.
Speaker 1 (29:15):
She didn't make the team, okay, but she did do
very very well.
Speaker 4 (29:18):
And what's interesting is a number of years ago her
archery coach called her and said, I was looking at
the statistics for National Association of American Archery and girls
participation in archery went up one hundred and five percent
in the year twenty twelve.
Speaker 1 (29:39):
Why two movies? Two movies? Can you name them? Yes,
Brave and Hunger Games.
Speaker 2 (29:46):
Yes.
Speaker 1 (29:47):
I remember actually covering this when I was working as
a reporter and we leaned on your insights. Yes, from
the Geena Davis Institute.
Speaker 4 (29:55):
They watched the movie they bought a bow. It was instantaneous.
So imagine after seeing all these fabulous female Team USA athletes,
You'm just thrilled to see fencing and wrestling and seeing
girls participation go up in those sports.
Speaker 1 (30:13):
There again is the real life impact of all these initiatives.
Thank you so much for coming on the bright side. Madeline,
thrilled you brought the brightness. Madeline Denono is the president
and CEO of the GENA. Davis Institute on Gender in Media.
You can check out their research on women's representation and
(30:35):
media on their website Genadavisinstitute dot org.
Speaker 3 (30:44):
That's it for today's show.
Speaker 2 (30:45):
Tomorrow, boxing World champion and actor Kaylee Reese, She's here
to talk about making history as an Indigenous actor thanks
to our partners at Airbnb. Listen and follow the bright
Side on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you
get your podcasts.
Speaker 1 (31:02):
I'm Simone Boye. You can find me at Simone Voice
on Instagram and TikTok.
Speaker 2 (31:06):
I'm Danielle Robe on Instagram and TikTok.
Speaker 3 (31:09):
That's r O b A.
Speaker 1 (31:11):
Y See you tomorrow, folks. Keep looking on the bright side.
Host
Simone Boyce
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!