The Truth about Goats
In attempt to combat accusations of cultural, ethnic or skill bias; the Oscars are planning to award prizes to ‘every person with a selfie-stick’. The short-list for Best Actor 2016 has now extended to include 1.4bn people of dubious talent, although a disproportionate number of the nominees are now teenage girls called ‘Harper’.
While there is a legitimate argument that employment data should mirror demographics, it is odd to suggest that ‘success’ should be equally as fair; which could lead to midgets winning basketball tournaments. One cinema viewer commented after having sat through 14 hours of ‘The Revenant’: ‘We don’t need more black actors, we just need more good actors. They can be green for all I care. As long as they don’t spend an entire film grunting in the snow’.
During the 60’s civil rights leaders identified the Oscars as the greatest source of social injustice, far more so than a lack of voting rights. An Academy spokesmen explained: ‘It shouldn’t matter who was the best. Or even if you entered the competition. We’re all beautiful. We all deserve an Oscar. And when everyone wins, bigotry will disappear. Except in the case of Tarantino. His films are still overly long and properly racist’.
Many have questioned about how a quota system would work – although the Oscars have managed to find their full share of ‘pretentious narcissists’ each year. The spokesman said: ‘The other option is great transparency. A system whereby anyone can be nominated, provided they star in a multi-million pound movie, advertising campaign and lifestyle…oh, that’s what we’ve got now’.