What Does Equitable Mean to a Filmmaker, Distributor, and a Librarian?
When thinking about what “equitable” may mean to a filmmaker, a distributor and a librarian, it is important to first recognize that people and organizations have varying degrees of access to privileges and resources. With less access, more support and adjustments are needed to address those imbalances in order for all to have a fair advantage. Equitability requires recognition that a person or organization may need more support and thus allocating, adjusting and/or sharing the resources needed in order to reach more equal outcomes for all.
With this understanding of how “equitable” should be interpreted, we can then look at how this concept applies to parties of the streaming media business; how these parties may perceive the disparities, and how they may assist each other in achieving an equitable position. Achieving an equitable position, benefits all parties and should be a shared, as well as an attainable goal.
Filmmakers
To start from the perspective of a filmmaker, someone working in this creative field today, we need to begin with the importance of representation and in particular the inclusion of people who have historically been underrepresented. We know that films and media, with how and who are represented in them, influence how we see and understand people and cultures, and also how we see ourselves. This is why representation matters. Filmmakers have the platform to tell stories that are authentic and inclusive, to question and dismantle stereotypes, to be a platform for different races, ethnicities, sexual orientations, disabilities, and more. To accurately tell the stories of underrepresented people, those creating and contributing to the works need to have lived the experiences themselves and this is only achievable through equitable funding of films, equitable hiring practices, representation both on and off-screen, and distribution of films created by these diverse voices.
In 2020, 74.6% of movie directors of theatrical films were white and 78.9% were male.
Along with a desire for representation and having their film seen by as many people as possible, most filmmakers also want to generate income in order to pay back investors, make a profit, and make their next film. Filmmakers may turn to a distributor as the best option to achieve these goals. Though some may choose to forgo working with a distributor and instead work directly with libraries to sell and license their work, the more commonplace practice for filmmakers is to go through an established distributor of educational films.
Distributors
For the purposes of this article, I am considering educational and institutional distributors and streaming platforms that typically market and distribute at the university and K-12 levels and other institutions like public libraries and non-profit organizations. Educational distributors do not all have the same business models and vary where what and how they distribute, including licensing options, which may include Public Performance Rights (PPR). They may offer filmmakers the choices to distribute their films on a title-by-title basis or in packages with different pricing options and subscription terms, and even life-of-file sales.
Profits
As a business, we might assume that making money is the primary concern of a distributor. Sales of streaming video licenses, the need for libraries to re-purchase these licenses periodically, and the fact that distributors often have ownership of exclusive rights to distribute some titles and collections all contribute to the potentiality to make large profits. Resisting disparagement of profit-making concerns is constructive for this discussion because some revenue is necessary in order for the distributors to be able to provide services and content, including creating and maintaining streaming platforms. But does the distributor have a role in ensuring equity amongst the parties? One way educational distributors have been playing a small role is by providing more favorable revenue splits than traditional or theatrical distributors, which are often 50/50 splits with the filmmaker. Helping filmmakers profit from their work helps to balance the advantages between the distributor and filmmaker.
Diversity, Equity and Inclusion
Though many educational distributors have always featured or specialized in content covering social, societal, environmental, and global issues, we have seen in the last several years, an increase in more collections and offerings for diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) content and marketing them as such. Distributors can help to ensure that library users have access to this content which increases representation and is inclusive and diverse. Distributors will also benefit by choosing films and compensating those filmmakers which represent this diversity. Audiences, not just in the educational market, want to see this representation. New evidence from the UCLA 2022 Hollywood Diversity Report supports their findings from earlier reports in this series that suggests America’s increasingly diverse audiences prefer diverse film content.
Librarians
Librarians at academic and public libraries are acutely aware of the importance of DEI content. Kanopy conducted informal surveys with academic libraries in 2021 and public libraries in 2020.
77.2% of academic librarians said collection diversity or DEI is "extremely" to "very important" to their streaming video collection
Only 25.8% believe that they are meeting this need
88.4% of public library participants said that collection diversity in their video selection is "important" to "very important"
Only 33% feel that they are meeting this need
Budgets and Purchase Models
Collection budgets are the primary determining factor of how much libraries can pay distributors for this content. While many libraries increase their spending on streaming media to meet patron demand and interest, in 2021, materials budgets only saw a slight increase of 0.5 percent and many libraries are still finding their budgets remaining flat.
Maximizing one’s budget is a necessity for libraries. A recent study by Choice found that subscription acquisition models are the most popular with direct purchases/firm orders following closely behind and then mediated purchases (based on patron requests) also commonly administered. Generally less popular are the patron-driven acquisitions (PDA) and demand-driven acquisitions (DDA) models. PDA and DDA present to be easier for librarians as unmediated acquisition models, allowing them to purchase at the user’s point of need. However, many have found that budgets can be overwhelmed and spent out quickly with users triggering purchases of films that they may not actually be interested in nor are relevant to the curriculum (for academic libraries).
While subscriptions are the most popular purchase model, they can also present issues. Based on access only and not ownership, these models can become very expensive and unsustainable over the years for most libraries with their barely increasing or flat budgets. And while purchases through distributors may have more streamlined workflows than those purchases made directly with a filmmaker, they still typically have a high labor cost for the library. Negotiating pricing and licensing, tracking licenses, cataloging, providing access and potentially having to remove cataloging and access after just a year for some licenses, all take a toll on technical services staff. In order for libraries to continue, and even increase their purchases of streaming media (including the essential DEI content), there is a need for distributors to develop and offer purchase models that meet the obligations of both library budgets and workflows.
Digital Equity
For the librarian, in addition to the aspiration to provide access to representative and diverse content, digital equity is also a concern. We continue to contend with a digital divide in the U.S. and the coronavirus pandemic has shown how necessary internet access is for many people to complete work, schooling, and even participate in social activities and customs. Libraries being able to acquire the streaming media does not make it automatically accessible to library users. In addition to the work done to make it discoverable and available, the library user needs to have the technology to view the media.
As of early 2021, the Pew Research Center reported:
4 in 10 adults with lower incomes do not have home broadband services (43%) or a desktop or laptop computer (41%)
27% of adults living in households earning less than $30,000 a year are smartphone-only internet users
These users complete many tasks traditionally done on larger devices like laptops, desktops and tablets on the smaller screen of a smartphone without broadband internet at home and this would include watching streaming films. In response to this disparity, a number of public libraries circulate technology (e.g., hotspots, laptops, and tablets) for patron use off-site and have offered 24/7 WiFi access by leaving on and extending their signal.
1 in 4 overall and 1 in 3 low-income U.S college students report that they sometimes have difficulty connecting to online course content due to internet issues and streaming video requires a fast and reliable internet connection.
In academic institutions, librarians recognize this link between access to digital resources and services and student success and retention. Federal, state, and institutional funding are a necessity as we cannot expect libraries to be able to close the digital divide on their own, but cost-effective purchase models for libraries through distributors are a small step that can help libraries re-distribute funds to assist.
Conclusion
In a discussion about the concept of equity and the streaming media business, our three parties, the filmmaker, the distributor and the librarian, have different, but at times, intersecting concerns and needs. When we fail to have an equitable streaming media system, we will not only fail to have content created that is representative of diversity but also encounter the difficulty of providing access to that diverse content. This equity in the ability to create the content, to distribute it and to make it accessible is ultimately beneficial for everyone, no matter what our social identities are or which role we play in this streaming media business.
