Oscars 2023: How the controversy around Andrea Riseborough’s nomination could change the way campaigning works

Published

2 years ago

March 10, 2023

admin

By the time the Academy Awards rolls out the red carpet each year, most stars in the running have spent months travelling the world, attending premieres and screenings, and schmoozing with industry VIPs to promote their films and themselves.

Oscars campaigning is a multimillion-dollar industry. While the Academy has strict rules to help ensure standout films and performances win fair and square, this year’s unexpected nomination of Andrea Riseborough in the best actress category has sparked debate about how the process works.

In the wake of the controversy, Academy president Janet Yang told Sky News campaigning rules will be revisited again following this year’s ceremony, with the “changing environment” of social media in particular to be looked at. “We are going to buckle down and look very closely at the regulations that have been with us for a while,” she said. “There are a lot of things that weren’t addressed in the current campaign regulations that we feel need to be addressed now.”

How does campaigning work?

Campaigning can include everything from advertising to red carpets to placing actors for the right interviews, all to build the narrative that a film and its stars are Oscar-worthy. Why do film studios do it? Well, there were 301 films eligible for this year’s Oscars – they need to get their films noticed.

The Academy has strict rules around “the annual rite” of campaigning, which include limitations on the number of mailings that studios can send, and also on promotional items, lobbying and parties.

Nominees are, unsurprisingly, banned from making negative or derogatory statements about their rivals in public. Penalties for those who breach the rules can include disqualification and any existing member of the Academy (typically a previous winner) could face suspension or expulsion.

Life on the campaign trail

At a reception for Oscar nominees held in London in February, a few days after an Oscars luncheon in LA, The Banshees Of Inisherin stars Colin Farrell, Brendan Gleeson and Kerry Condon rubbed shoulders with fellow acting nominees including Angela Bassett, Michelle Yeoh and Ke Huy Quan, as well as industry bigwigs.

“It’s crazy!” Condon said when asked about the work that goes on in the run-up. “It’s like a whole other skill that you have to be good at, chatting to people and getting your picture taken and all sorts of things you wouldn’t think of as an actor. And you have to get good at them fast.”

For some, this is all good fun. Take Everything Everywhere All At Once star Quan, who has made no secret of his excitement. “The audience embracing the movie the way they did is beyond anything we ever imagined,” he said. “I’m enjoying awards season very much… it’s been a wild ride.”

But it can be hard work. Producer Gareth Ellis-Unwin picked up his best picture Oscar for The King’s Speech in 2011 and is now an Academy Awards (and BAFTAs) voter. “It surprised me,” he says of the campaign for the film, which lasted for more than three months. “It was like running for local office.”

In 2016, former winner Susan Sarandon spoke out against the process, likening it to the race to become US president in terms of the cost and length. Speaking on a panel at that year’s Cannes Film Festival, she called for a reform to campaign finance. “People have to be available for months and someone has to pay for that,” she said.

Twelve years on from his win, Ellis-Unwin, who is now head of film and animation at the charity Screen Skills, says things are changing.

“Now you can bring a focus to a film project or TV show and not have the same marketing spend you had 10 years ago. Our distributors joked that it cost something like $30m to market our film for the award ceremony, which is twice the budget for the film.”

Why was Riseborough’s nomination a surprise?

The British actress’s nod for her performance in To Leslie – a small indie film in which she plays an alcoholic single mother who wins the lottery – was unexpected because there had been no substantial buzz surrounding her beforehand.

And because black actresses who did have that buzz – Viola Davis, for The Woman King, and Danielle Deadwyler, for Till missed out. While Davis, Deadwyler and others seemingly played the more traditional campaign game, Riseborough’s nomination came in the wake of praise on social media from A-listers including Gwyneth Paltrow, Jennifer Aniston and Edward Norton.

There is no suggestion Riseborough herself did anything wrong. But the controversy has raised questions over what campaigning looks like in the future, and reignited debates around opportunity and racism in the film industry.

Shortly after this year’s shortlists were announced, the Academy launched a review to ensure no campaign rules were broken. After a short investigation, the organisation said it discovered “social media and outreach campaigning tactics that caused concern” surrounding To Leslie, but not to the level that Riseborough should lose her nod.

Yang told Sky News it was an “unusual situation” but that no rules were broken “based on the existing rules”.

Can voters really be swayed?

When it comes to aggressive campaigning, industry insiders say it began with disgraced producer Harvey Weinstein; he reportedly started a whisper campaign against Steven Spielberg‘s Saving Private Ryan in 1999, when it was in the running for best picture alongside his own film Shakespeare In Love – which went on to win. The Academy has since tightened its campaigning rules.

Addressing the Riseborough controversy, Jenelle Riley, features editor for US entertainment publication Variety, says there is a “whole industry devoted to campaigning” but Academy voters will ultimately choose the films and stars they believe are worthy.

“The Academy is going to do what they want to do and they’re going to vote for what they want,” she says. “Nobody can force you to check off her name on a ballot. If people voted for her, it’s because they want to.

“Anyone who has seen To Leslie is not going to argue that she didn’t deserve to be nominated… the truth is, there’s just an embarrassment of riches. Part of me thinks they should increase the number of nominees.”

Can Riseborough win?

There could be a last-minute upset, but it seems unlikely. Not necessarily because of the campaigning investigation, but because the best actress category looked set to be a two-horse race between Cate Blanchett (Tar) and Yeoh (Everything Everywhere All At Once) even before the nominations were announced.

“The nomination is the win” for Riseborough, says Matthew Belloni, former editor of The Hollywood Reporter and a founding partner of digital media company Puck.

However, he says he doesn’t believe the investigation harmed her chances. “If anything, I think she picked up some votes because people didn’t like that this campaign was castigated. Members I’ve talked to thought it was ridiculous that they were potentially being punished for this,” he said.

Click to subscribe to Backstage wherever you get your podcasts

Future rule changes?

Belloni describes the To Leslie campaign as innovative, having bypassed the traditional avenues of advertising, throwing parties and putting “the talent on a circuit of interviews and handshaking”.

Without a big budget behind them they instead built up support on social media.

Despite the Academy deciding not to take away Riseborough’s nomination, Belloni says he believes the scandal will lead to further rule changes limiting social media activity.

“I think it’s going to change things. I think we’re going to see new rules and it’s going to update the Academy code of conduct for the social media age,” she said.

You can watch the Academy Awards on Sunday 12 March from 11pm in the UK exclusively on Sky News and Sky Showcase. And for everything you need to know ahead of the ceremony, don’t miss our special Backstage podcast, available now, plus a winners special episode from Monday morning.

Entertainment

Glastonbury 2025 line-up revealed

Published

11 hours ago

March 6, 2025

admin

The 1975 and Olivia Rodrigo will be among the stars headlining Glastonbury Festival this year, it has been announced.

Glastonbury organisers have revealed the line-up for this summer’s event, taking place between 25 June and 29 June, after months of speculation.

The 1975 will take to the iconic Pyramid Stage on the Friday to headline, then Canadian singer-songwriter Neil Young will perform on Saturday and Olivia Rodrigo on the Sunday.

Other big names performing include British pop sensation Charli XCX, rapper Loyle Carner electronic group The Prodigy.

The announcement comes after Sir Rod Stewart was booked for the Sunday teatime legend slot and Young was confirmed as a headliner earlier this year.

Young’s announcement in January came amid some confusion, as he had days before told fans he was pulling out of the festival because the BBC’s involvement was a “corporate turn-off”.

The Canadian singer-songwriter later said this decision was down to “an error in the information I received”.

The 1975 will be headlining for the first time, having made their Glastonbury debut in 2014.

The Cheshire band, known for hits such as Somebody Else and Chocolate, have regularly made headlines due to the antics of frontman Matty Healy.

Glastonbury, which takes place at Worthy Farm in Somerset in the summer, has worked closely with the BBC – its exclusive broadcast partner – since 1997.

Appetite for the esteemed festival saw standard tickets sell out in 35 minutes in November.

They cost £373.50 plus a £5 booking fee, up £18.50 from the price from the 2024 festival, and were sold exclusively through the See Tickets website.

The date for the resale – where tickets not fully paid for are put back up for purchase – is set for some time in spring.

The headliners last summer on the iconic Pyramid Stage were Dua Lipa, SZA and Coldplay, who made history as the first act to headline the festival five times.

2026 is likely to be a year off for Glastonbury, with the festival traditionally taking place four out of every five years, and the fifth year reserved for rehabilitation of the land.

Entertainment

Sabrina Carpenter and Charli XCX BRIT Awards appearances spark hundreds of Ofcom complaints

Published

1 day ago

March 5, 2025

admin

Sabrina Carpenter and Charli XCX BRIT Awards appearances spark hundreds of Ofcom complaints

Ofcom received 825 complaints over the Brit Awards, with the majority relating to Sabrina Carpenter’s raunchy performance and Charli XCX’s outfit, the media watchdog says.

US pop star Carpenter, 25, sported a red sparkly military-style blazer dress for her performance at the awards show on Saturday night, paired with stockings and suspenders for a rendition of Espresso.

The song was mixed with a Rule Britannia mash-up, as dancers in military parade dress followed her.

She then switched to a red sparkly bra and shorts for her next song, Bad Chem, which she performed alongside dancers in bras and shorts while sitting suggestively on a large bed.

Carpenter later received the global success award at the ceremony, and was also nominated in the international artist and international song of the year categories.

But much of the buzz on social media surrounded her performance, which took place before the 9pm watershed.

Ofcom said some of the complaints were also aimed at British pop sensation Charli XCX, who dominated the night by winning five awards, including album of the year.

Some viewers took issue with her outfit – a black see-through dress.

The singer addressed the concerns during her acceptance speech for artist of the year, saying: “I heard that ITV were complaining about my nipples. I feel like we’re in the era of ‘free the nipple’ though, right?”

Carpenter paid tribute to the UK in her acceptance speech, saying: “The Brits have given me this award, and this feels like such an insane honour in a very primarily tea-drinking country… you really understood my dry sense of humour because your sense of humour is so, so dry. So I love y’all more than you even understand.”

Entertainment

Why is Noel Clarke suing The Guardian?

Published

1 day ago

March 5, 2025

admin

Actor Noel Clarke begins his High Court libel case against The Guardian’s publisher today.

Clarke, 49, is suing Guardian News and Media (GNM) over a series of articles it published about him in April 2021.

They were based on the claims of 20 women Clarke knew “in a professional capacity” who allege his behaviour towards them amounted to sexual misconduct.

Clarke, known for his roles in the Kidulthood trilogy and Dr Who, “vehemently” denies “any sexual misconduct or wrongdoing”.

What will the trial cover?

Clarke is suing GNM for libel, sometimes also referred to as defamation.

It’s a civil tort – not a criminal offence – defined as false written statements that have damaged the person’s reputation. This means Clarke can seek redress or damages but no one will face charges or prison.

Clarke claims the articles The Guardian published in 2021 altered public opinion of him, damaged his reputation, and lost him work.

He said after the allegations emerged: “In a 20-year career, I have put inclusivity and diversity at the forefront of my work and never had a complaint made against me.

“If anyone who has worked with me has ever felt uncomfortable or disrespected, I sincerely apologise. I vehemently deny any sexual misconduct or wrongdoing and intend to defend myself against these false allegations.”

The Guardian is defending the claim on the basis of truth and public interest.

It said in its statement: “Our reporting on Noel Clarke in 2021 was based on the accounts of 20 brave women. After we published our first article, more women came forward.

“At trial, 32 witnesses are set to testify against Mr Clarke under oath. We look forward to a judge hearing the evidence.”

The trial will only focus on liability – not the amount of damages to be paid if Clarke is successful.

The actor tried and failed to get the case struck out in January, with his legal team saying it had “overwhelming evidence” of “perversion of the course of justice”.

His lawyers told the High Court three of the journalists involved in the articles had “deliberately and permanently” deleted messages, which meant he could not get a fair trial.

Lawyers for GNM told the court there was “no adequate evidential basis” for Clarke’s application for a strike out and said it sought “to smear Guardian journalists and editors without any proper justification”.

The trial, which will be presided over by judge Mrs Justice Steyn, is expected to last between four and six weeks.

What has happened since the articles were published?

A month before the articles about him were published in April 2021, Clarke received BAFTA’s outstanding contribution to British cinema award.

However, once the allegations against him emerged, he was suspended by the organisation and the prize rescinded.

His management and production company 42M&P told Sky News they were no longer representing him and Sky cancelled its TV show Bulletproof, starring Clarke and Top Boy actor Ashley Walters as the lead roles.

ITV also decided to pull the finale of another of his dramas, Viewpoint, following the Guardian articles.

The Met Police looked into the allegations against Clarke for any potential criminal wrongdoing, but in March 2022 announced they “did not meet the threshold for criminal investigation”.

Clarke filed the libel claim the following month and has attended several of the preliminary hearings in person.

He says he has faced a “trial by media” – and that the ordeal has left him suicidal and in need of professional help.

‘Rising star’

Clarke made his TV debut in a revived version of Auf Wiedersehen Pet in 2002.

Soon after he played Mickey Smith in Dr Who and Kwame in the six-part Channel 4 series Metrosexuality.

He wrote and starred in the film trilogy Kidulthood, Adulthood, and Brotherhood, which were based in west London, where he grew up, and explored the lives of a group of teenagers given time off school after a bullied classmate takes their own life.

It was a box office success and eventually saw Clarke given BAFTA’s rising star prize in 2009.

Anyone feeling emotionally distressed or suicidal can call Samaritans for help on 116 123 or email jo@samaritans.org in the UK. In the US, call the Samaritans branch in your area or 1 (800) 273-TALK.