Inclusion in Netflix Original U.S.
Scripted Series & Films
Dr. Stacy L. Smith, Dr. Katherine Pieper, Sam Wheeler & Katherine Neffwith assistance from

Ariana Case, Terrell Shaffer, Zoe Moore & Karla Hernandez

FULL REPORT

April 2023

Inclusion in Netflix Fictional Films & Scripted Series:
2018-2021
Annenberg Inclusion Initiative

The purpose of this research is to provide an update on inclusion in Netflix films and scripted series. To
complement our previous investigation of content from 2018 (69 fictional films, 80 series) and 2019 (57fictional films, 100 series), we examined stories from 2020 (58 fictional films, 64 series) and 2021 (65 fictionalfilms, 53 series).1 Thus, a total of 546 fictional narratives (249 fictional films, 297 series) were assessed forthis investigation.
These English-language, Netflix original, live action programs were assessed for several inclusion metrics(e.g., gender, race/ethnicity, LGBTQ+, disability). Below, the findings are presented by identity group. As inprevious reports, we specify that a meaningful difference is one that reaches a minimum of 5 percentage
points between groups. Where possible, we provide comparisons to our own top-grossing box office film
data as well as other relevant reports on scripted or episodic content to provide industry benchmarking.
GENDER

In this section, we present results related to gender distribution both on screen and behind the camera
across four years of Netflix scripted films and series. First, we examine current trends in 2021 and then assess
how this year compared to 2018. For some indicators, we look at gender differences across time (2018, 2019,2020, 2021) and format (film vs. scripted series).

On Screen: Film & Series
Gender was assessed on screen in multiple ways. First, we focused on who drove the plot or storyline as thelead/co-lead. For film, this was the number of movies that centered on a female-identified protagonist.2 For
series, leads/co leads were established by examining the number of shows where girls and women filled
50% or more of series regular roles.3
In 2021, 61% (n=72) of all stories evaluated (film and series) were driven by girls and women (see Table 1),
which was substantially above the proportion of females in the U.S. population (50.5%).4 By format, a full
64.6% (n=42) of Netflix films in 2021 had a female lead/co lead and 56.6% (n=30) of Netflix series.
Netflix also has demonstrated a substantial increase in the number of female leads/co leads in their scripted
storytelling (film and tv) overtime, rising 12.4 percentage points from 2018 (48.6%) to 2021 (61%). However,the largest jump was observed from 2018 to 2019 and incremental gains were noted in the years following(2020=56.7%, 2021=61%).
Looking within format, the increase overall in female leads/co leads was largely accounted for in film. The
percentage of female protagonists increased 18.2 percentage points from 2018 (46.4%) to 2021 (64.6%).
Pivoting to scripted series, there was an increase of 6 percentage points from 2018 (50.6%) to 2021 (56.6%).
Only one of the female-led series had a non-binary series regular character.

Page 1

Table 1
Percentage of Female-Identified Lead/Co-Leads by Storytelling Format And Year
Format

2018

2019

2020

2021

Total

Film

46.4%
(n=32)

50.9%(n=29)

58.6%(n=34)

64.6%(n=42)

55%(n=137)

Scripted Series

50.6%(n=40)

57.7%(n=56)

54.8%(n=34)

56.6%(n=30)

55%(n=160)Overall48.6%(n=72)

55.2%(n=85)

56.7%(n=68)

61%(n=72)

55%(n=297)

Note: Leads represent the central figure(s) across a story’s plot. In film, two equal protagonists sharing
the central journey of the story were counted as co-leads. Scripted series with 50% or more femaleidentified ser ies reg u lars were included as having female lead s/c o- leads. Not one lead/co leadcharacter wa s g end e r non-binary across the shows and movie s e va luated.

While Netflix is exceeding population norms for female-driven fare, how do they compare to the rest of theentertainment industry? In 2021, female leads/co leads in Netflix films (64.6%) dramatically outpaced
female leads/co leads in top-grossing films (41%).5 Focusing on Netflix series data, 56.6% (n=30) of
programs were female-led as opposed to 44.8% of leads across the 2020/21 broadcast, cable, and digital
television season.6 Based on these findings, Netflix is outperforming the competition on this indicator.
Besides lead/co leads, we also examined the main cast in Netflix films and scripted series. Main castconsisted of primary and secondary roles that drive the plot in movies, which increases our sample size fromthe previous leads analysis. For movies, the main cast was retrieved from the landing page of each film on
the Netflix website. In episodic content, series regulars were those recurring roles across a show’s season
as defined by Luminate (formerly Variety Insight).
In 2021, the overall percentage of female main cast/series regulars in film and scripted content was 46.8%.7
No differences were observed in 2021 by format (film=46.7%; scripted series=46.9%). However, a significant
jump was observed within film by year. To illustrate, girls and women accounted for 38.9% of main cast in
2018 films and 40.9% in 2020 films but 46.7% of the main cast in 2021. This represents a 7.8 percentage
point increase over the 4-year time frame of the sample. There were no differences in the percentage offemale series regulars by year in scripted series (see Table 2). However, this is likely because scripted
content has been close to proportional representation across 3 of the 4 years evaluated.

Page 2

Table 2
Percentage of Female-Identified Main Cast By Storytelling Format And Year
Format

2018

2019

2020

2021

Total

Film

38.9%
(n=215)41.1%(n=195)40.9%(n=224)46.7%(n=287)42.1%(n=921)

Scripted Series

46.4%(n=301)48%(n=357)48.9%(n=234)46.9%(n=183)47.5%(n=1,075)

Total

42.9%
(n=516)45.4%(n=552)44.6%(n=458)46.8%(n=470)44.9%(n=1,996)

Note: A total of 3 nonbinary main cast/series regulars were observed across the entire 4-year sample

When compared to the wider industry, both Netflix program types held strong. In 2021, Netflix films had girls
and women in 46.7% (n=287) of main cast roles as opposed to only 35% of major characters in top-grossing
films.8 Girls and women comprised 46.9% (n=183) of main cast in Netflix scripted series, which is on par withthe percentage of female major characters 48.9% in broadcast and streaming series in 2020-21.9 It is
important to note that only 3 nonbinary characters were series regulars/main cast across the entire sample
time frame. Three of these nonbinary characters were in scripted content (Another Life, Season 1 & 2; FeelGood, Season 2) and one was in film (There’s Someone Inside Your House).
Table 3
Percentage of Female-Identified Speaking Characters By Storytelling Format And Year
Format

2018

2019

2020

2021

Total

Film

35.8%
(n=898)36.5%(n=799)38.9%(n=875)40.8%(n=811)37.9%(n=3,383)

Scripted Series

39.9%(n=1,364)

41.1%(n=1,663)

41%(n=1,033)

42.1%(n=827)40.9%(n=4,887)

Total

38.2%
(n=2,262)

39.5%(n=2,462)

40%(n=1,908)

41.4%(n=1,638)

39.6%(n=8,270)

Note: A total of 5 nonbinary speaking characters were observed across the entire 4-year sample

Lastly, we looked at the percentage of speaking and/or named characters by gender. In 2021, 41.4% of all
speaking characters assessed were girls or women, a percentage that did not vary by format (film=40.8%,
series=42.1%). An interaction between format and year emerged, however. For film, a 5-percentage point

Page 3

increase in female speaking characters from 2018 to 2021 was observed. No difference was revealed forseries. Beyond main cast/series regulars (n=3), only two additional speaking or named characters (One Day
at a Time, Season 2) across the entire 4-year sample were coded as nonbinary.
How did Netflix compare with the broader entertainment ecosystem of female-identified speaking
characters? Netflix films have had slightly more female-identified speaking characters than the wider
industry, with 2021 being a standout year (see Table 4). Meanwhile, scripted series have remained slightly
behind but not significantly different from their industry peers.
Table 4
Percentage of Female-Identified Speaking Characters in Netflix & Industry Films and Series by Year
Film

Series

Year
2018

2019

2020

2021

2018

2019

2020

2021

% of female-identified
speaking characters,
Netflix

35.8%

36.5%

38.9%

40.8%

39.9%

41.1%

41%

42.1%

% of female-identified
speaking characters,industry

33.1%

34%

36%

32.9%

40%

45%

43%

45%

Note: The film industry comparisons for 2018, 2019, and 2021 are from the Annenberg Inclusion Initiative report. For 2020 film andscripted series, the percentages are from San Diego State University (SDSU). Using the SDSU research, the 2018 cell is from the 2017/18
season, the 2019 cell is from 2018/19, the 2020 cell is from 2019/20, and the 2021 cell is from 2020/21. From 2018-2020, Lauzen reports
the percentage of female speaking characters across broadcast, cable, and streaming. For 2021, only the average for broadcast andstreaming was reported.9

We asked an additional question at the film and scripted series level: how many stories featured a genderbalanced cast? This allowed us to disaggregate the data and gauge the distribution of girls and women on
screen on a story-by-story basis. We evaluated this at the program level and took into consideration how
many films and series met or exceeded proportional representation of females according to the U.S.
Census (50.8%).
A gender-balanced story was defined as featuring girls and women in 45.7% to 55.8% of all speaking or
named roles.10 In 2021, 37.3% or 44 of the 118 Netflix films and series analyzed met or exceeded proportional
representation (see Table 5). Series (45.3%) had a significantly higher percentage of gender-balanced
stories than did film (30.8%). While the proportion of stories with a gender-balanced cast increased acrossboth formats, only series demonstrated a meaningful change from 2018 to 2021.

Page 4

Table 5
At Or Above Gender Balance By Storytelling Format & Year
Format

2018

2019

2020

2021

Total

Film

26.1%
(n=18)

31.6%(n=18)

37.9%(n=22)

30.8%(n=20)

31.3%(n=78)

Scripted Series

32.5%(n=26)

33%(n=33)

40.6%(n=26)

45.3%(n=24)

36.7%(n=109)

Total

29.5%
(n=44)

32.5%(n=51)

39.3%(n=48)

37.3%(n=44)

34.2%(n=187)For our last analysis of this section, we examined how many stories rendered female speaking characterscompletely invisible. That is, were there stories with no women or girls speaking at all across the unfolding
narrative. Only 1 film met this criterion in 2020. Put differently, 545 of the 546 stories evaluated depicted atleast one female speaking or named character.
To summarize, over half of Netflix films and series depicted female-identified leads/co leads consistently ator above U.S. population norms. Since 2018, the percentage of females in the main cast and speaking
characters for film has increased significantly, demonstrating a commitment to match their series
counterparts. In series, however, a substantial increase in the percentage of gender balanced stories wasobserved. Now, we turn to the gender profile of content creators working behind the camera in Netflix films
and series.

Behind the Scenes: Film
While the above findings illuminate on-screen data, this section will explore representation of women
working behind the camera across Netflix films and series. For this section, analytics were handled
differently for each format. Above-the-line personnel were assessed for each movie (i.e., director, writer,
producer). For series, some indicators were evaluated per episode as writers and directors often change
throughout the season. As such, the scripted series personnel are substantially larger than the film
personnel. Given that these differences can mask and skew overall findings, we reported on behind-thecamera personnel separately by storytelling format.

Film. Who is Netflix hiring to work behind the scenes in film? In 2021, a total of 414 above-the-line personnel(i.e., directors, writers, producers) were evaluated across 65 Netflix films (see Table 6).11 Focusing on
specific positions, a total of 67 directors were in the movie sample with 73.1% of helmers men (n=49) and26.9% women (n=18). It is important to note there were no directors who were identified as gendernonbinary. While the percentage of women directors increased from 2020 (16.7%, n=10), there has been
little change when compared 2018 (see Table 6).

Page 5

Table 6
Percentage of Women Above-the-Line in Film By Year
Measures

2018

2019

2020

2021

Total

Directors

25%(n=18)

20.7%(n=12)

16.7%(n=10)

26.9%(n=18)

22.6%(n=58)

Writers27.5%(n=28)

23%(n=23)(n=22)

22%

33%(n=35)

26.5%(n=108)

Producers

28.6%(n=72)

29.6%(n=53)

29.7%(n=60)

29%(n=70)

29.2%(n=255)

Total

27.7%
(n=118)26.1%(n=88)

25.4%(n=92)

29.7%(n=123)27.4%(n=421)

We compared Netflix employment statistics of women directors to those found across the 100 top-grossing
domestic films. As shown in Figure 1, Netflix films consistently featured a higher percentage of women
directors than those top films released at the box office. This year was no exception. The number of Netflix
female directors in 2021 (26.9%) was 14.2 percentage points higher than the top-grossing films (12.7%).
Figure 1
Percentage of Women Directors by Type of Distributor & Year

Shifting focus to screenwriters, 67% (n=71) were men and 33% (n=35) were women in 2021 (see Table 6).
When compared to the past 4 years, 2021 is the strongest year for women writers, increasing 5.5 percentage
points from 2018 (27.5%). Netflix films have continued their trend of representing more womenscreenwriters than top-grossing fare across all four years evaluated (see Figure 2). To illustrate, 33% (n=35)
of screenwriters were women in Netflix 2021 films but only 17.1% of writers were female in 2021’s topgrossing movies.12

Page 6

Figure 2
Percentage of Women Screenwriters by Type of Distributor & YearTo finish out the behind-the-camera positions in film, we assessed producing credits for gender. Only
creatives credited as producers (e.g., Produced by) without any modifiers (e.g., Executive, Co, Associate)
were included in the analysis. This narrow approach was taken to ensure the focus was on those individuals
responsible for films being finished on time and within budget.
Figure 3
Percentage of Women Producers by Type of Distributor & Year

In 2021, a total of 241 producers were credited across 65 movies, with 71% men (n=171) and 29% women(n=70). Since 2018, no differences have emerged by year (see Table 6). However, when we compare thenumber of women producers in Netflix movies to the 100 top-grossing films in 2021 a meaningful difference
emerged. In 2021, Netflix films featured more women producers (29%, n=70) than did top-grossing films(22.6%). Across 4 years, Netflix featured more women producers than top-grossing films each year.
Was there a relationship between gender prevalence on screen and the presence of women working behindthe camera? To answer this question, we divided the sample into two groups. Starting with directors, wetook into consideration every film that had at least one-woman director attached. We then created a second
group of films with only male directors. Next, we examined the percentage of female-identified film leads/co
leads, main cast, and speaking characters across these two groups. The same process was repeated forscreenwriters and producers.

Page 7

Table 7
Percentage Of Female-Identified Leads, Main Cast, & Speaking Characters
by Content Creator Gender in 2021 Films
Directors

Writers

Producers

Measures

Woman
Director
Attached

No Woman
Director
Attached

Woman
Writer
Attached

No WomanWriter
Attached

Woman
Producer
Attached

No Woman
Producer
Attached

Leads/Co
Leads

79.3%
(n=23)

54.9%(n=39)

71.1%(n=32)

54.5%(n=30)

68.8%(n=44)

50%(n=18)

Main Cast54%(n=102)43.5%(n=185)51.6%(n=145)42.6%(n=142)48.2%(n=185)44.3%(n=102)

Speaking
Characters43.8%(n=244)39.7%(n=567)46.1%(n=364)37.3%(n=447)39.9%(n=466)42.2%(n=345)

Note: To be categorized as “woman director attached,” one or more women were credited as a helmer on the film. The same process
was applied for screenwriters and producers.

Unsurprisingly, the data revealed the importance of having a woman in a leadership role behind the camera(see Table 7). Films with at least one woman director attached had significantly more girls and women on
screen as leads/co leads (79.3% vs. 54.9%), main cast (54% vs. 43.5%), and speaking characters (43.8%
vs. 39.7%) than did those films without at least one woman director attached.
This trend continued when we focused on women screenwriters. Stories with at least one woman writer had
more girls and women than did those stories without a woman writer attached: leading/co leading roles(71.1% vs. 54.5%), main cast (51.6% vs. 42.6%), and speaking characters (46.1% vs. 37.3%).
Finally, when at least one female producer was present we continued to see more on-screen female
representation. This was true for leads/co leads (68.8% vs. 50%). The number of and main cast (48.2% vs.
44.3%) or speaking characters who were girls and women did not differ by producer gender, however (seeTable 7).
The findings in this section continue to highlight that Netflix hired or green lit stories with women behind thecamera at or above film industry norms. Hiring practices matter, as content with a woman behind the camera
leads to more girls and women on screen in the center of storytelling. The evidence also reveals that men’s
casting decisions were less likely to be gender inclusive compared to women’s casting decisions.

Behind the Scenes: Scripted Series
Within the Netflix series sample, we accounted for every creator, producer, writer, and director that worked
on each individual episode. In 2021, a total of 2,108 above-the-line personnel were credited. Overall, 60.8%

Page 8

of these jobs were held by men (n=1,281) and 39.2% were held by women (n=826), while one person was
gender non-binary. Table 8 reveals the distribution of gender within position by year.
Table 8Percentage Of Women Above-the-Line in Scripted Series By Year
Measures

2018

2019

2020

2021

Total

Creators

26.9%(n=32)

32.2%(n=47)

25.2%(n=26)

38.1%(n=32)

30.3%(n=137)

Producers33.3%(n=246)39.6%(n=349)38.6%(n=261)38.3%(n=203)37.5%(n=1,059)

Writers30.6%(n=372)41.3%(n=590)39.6%(n=312)41.1%(n=404)38%(n=1,678)

Directors

25.1%(n=191)30%(n=271)38.1%(n=204)36.7%(n=187)31.5%(n=853)

Total

29.7%
(n=841)37.4%(n=1,257)38.2%(n=803)39.2%(n=826)35.8%(n=3,727)

Series creators hold the top leadership position in scripted fare. In 2021 (see Table 8), over a third of theseprestigious posts were held by women (38.1%) which was a substantial increase from 2018 (26.9%). As
shown in Figure 4. Netflix has outpaced the industry in putting women show creators behind the scenes in2019 and 2021 series.13
Figure 4
Percentage of Women Creators of Series by Type of Distributor & Year

Page 9

Shifting focus to producers, we examined credited individuals with the producer moniker in their title
working across the majority of the season. Of the 530 producers identified in 2021 series, 61.7% were men(n=327) and 38.3% were women (n=203). While this was a meaningful increase from 2018 (33.3%), womenin the producer role have not changed significantly since 2019. In terms of the industry (see Figure 5), Netflix
has not been different from overall industry patterns in employing women producers across the entire
sample time frame.14
Figure 5
Percentage of Women Producers in Series by Type of Distributor & YearThe next behind-the-camera position we focused on were credited writers (n=984). In total, 58.8% (n=579)
of writers were male, 41.1% (n=404) were female, and <1% (n=1) were gender nonbinary. As shown in Table
8, there was a substantial increase in women writers in 2021 (41.1%) when compared to 2018 (30.6%). Netflix(41.1%, n=404) was significantly above the industry norm (34%) in terms of hiring women writers in 2021, as
well as in 2018 and 2019.15
Figure 6
Percentage of Women Writers in Series by Type of Distributor & YearThe final position evaluated was directors. Each series episode was examined with a total of 510 directors
included in this year’s analysis. Males (63.3%, n=323) were more likely to direct an episode of a Netflix series

Page 10than females (36.7%, n=187). When compared to 2018, there was a significant increase of 11.6 percentage
points for women directors. Overall, Netflix was on par with the industry in three of the four years evaluated(see Figure 7).16
Figure 7
Percentage of Women Directors in Series by Type of Distributor & YearThe final analysis conducted in this section focused on the relationship between the gender of show creatorsand character gender. To do this, we placed series into one of two categories: those with at least one-woman
creator and those without any women creators. From there, we analyzed the percentages of femaleidentifying characters and series regulars.
As shown in Figure 8, scripted series with at least one-woman creator featured more female series regulars
and speaking characters than those shows without a woman creator. More than half (55.9%, n=100) of series
regulars were female when a woman creator was present, versus only 38% (n=73) of series with solely malecreators.17 When it comes to on-screen speaking characters, we found that female show creators ensured
that 47.7% (n=457) of these roles were filled by girls and women. In comparison, male show creators
depicted girls and women on screen in only 35.9% (n=320) of all speaking roles. The data demonstrates theclear influence women in creative roles have on achieving gender equality on screen. Put differently, thepresence of woman series creators was associated with an increase of girls and women on screen.
Figure 8
Percentage Of Female-Identified Series Regulars & Speaking Characters
In 2021 By Content Creators’ Gender

Page 11

Overall, this section reveals the value Netflix places on storytelling by and about girls and women. While
Netflix has some room to improve around inclusion of female-identified main cast members and speaking
characters, as the behind-the-camera analysis shows, men in positions of influence can do more to include
girls and women on screen. While these findings demonstrate Netflix’s ongoing commitment to stories
centered on and by women, there were still pieces of the picture missing. To fill in those pieces weintersected gender and race/ethnicity to illuminate where bias and hiring gaps continue to exist. As a result,the next section addresses how underrepresented racial/ethnic groups fare both on screen and behind thecamera.
RACE/ETHNICITYThis section provides an overview of results related to the prevalence of underrepresented racial/ethnic
groups on screen and behind the camera across Netflix films and series. As above, results from 2021 arecompared to 2018. For some measures, we examine differences across all four years evaluated and byformat.

On Screen: Film & Series
On-screen prevalence of race/ethnicity for leads/co-leads, main cast/series regulars, and speaking
characters was examined. A modified version of the U.S. Census categorization (i.e., White, Black,
Hispanic/Latino, Asian, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, Middle Eastern/North African, American
Indian/Alaskan Native, Multiracial/Multiethnic) was used for our measure of race/ethnicity.18 For analysis,
this metric was collapsed into two categories (White vs. Underrepresented). Information by racial/ethnic
group is presented briefly here and with more detail later in the report.
Table 9Percentage of Underrepresented Leads/Co-Leads By Storytelling Format and Year
Format

2018

2019

2020

2021

Total

Film

31.9%
(n=22)

40.4%(n=23)

46.6%(n=27)

47.7%(n=31)

41.4%(n=103)

Series25.3%(n=20)

42.7%(n=41)

46.8%(n=29)

47.2%(n=25)

39.7%(n=115)

Total

28.4%
(n=42)

41.8%(n=64)

46.7%(n=56)

47.5%(n=56)

40.4%(n=218)

Note: Leads represent the central figure(s) across a story’s plot. In film, two equal protagonists sharing the central journey of the story

were counted as co-leads. Scripted series with 40% or more underrepresented-identified series regulars were included as having
underrepresented leads/co-leads.

First, the presence of an underrepresented lead/co lead was explored. This program-level measureindicates whether a film had at least one lead/co lead character from an underrepresented racial/ethnic

Page 12group. In series, a program had an underrepresented lead/co lead when at least 40% of series regularcharacters were underrepresented19 which is on par with proportional representation in the U.S.
As shown in Table 9, 47.5% (n=56) of Netflix’s 2021 stories had an underrepresented lead/co lead which did
not differ for film (47.7%) or series (47.2%). Thus, the percentage of underrepresented leads/co leads was
significantly above the U.S. population estimate (40.7%)20 Over the past four years, Netflix has
demonstrated a substantial increase in the number of underrepresented leads/co leads in all scripted
content. In fact, there was a 19.1 percentage point gain from 2018 to 2021. The largest increase was observed
from 2018 to 2019 with the following years building upon these gains.
The percentage of lead/co lead characters in 2021 by specific racial/ethnic group was evaluated for film andseries collectively. Of all leads, 38.9% of leads/co leads were White, 21.8% were Black/African American,
12.9% were Hispanic/Latino, 8.9% were Asian, 1.4% Middle Eastern/North African, 1.4% were Native
Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and 14.6% were Multiracial/Multiethnic.
Focusing on each individual format, both film and series increased the percentage of stories with
underrepresented leads/co leads over time. The number of protagonists of color in film has increased from2018 (31.9%) to 2021 (47.7%). Focusing on series, there was a gain of 21.9 percentage points from 2018 to
2021. No matter the format, Netflix clearly has a commitment to casting underrepresented actors in main
roles.
Table 10
Underrepresented Leads/Co-Leads In Netflix & Top-Grossing Films By Year
Measures

2018

2019

2020

2021

% of Netflix films w/an underrepresented
lead/co-lead

31.9%(n=22)

40.4%(n=23)

46.6%(n=27)

47.7%(n=31)

28% (n=28)

31% (n=31)% of top-grossing films w/an
underrepresented lead/co-lead

28% (n=28) 32% (n=32)

Note: Data on top-grossing films are from the Annenberg Inclusion Initiative.21

Not only is Netflix above demographic norms according to the U.S. Census, they have also
outpaced top-grossing movies in the percentage of stories showcasing protagonists of color. In
2021 specifically, Netflix films (47.7%) had significantly more underrepresented lead/co leads than
top movies (32%).22

Page 13

Table 11
Underrepresented Leads/Co-Leads In Netflix & Industry Series By Year
Measures

2018

2019

2020

2021

% of Netflix series w/an underrepresented lead/colead

25.3%(n=20)

42.7%(n=41)

46.8%(n=29)

47.2%(n=25)% of series industry-wide w/an underrepresented
lead/co-lead

22.3%

27.7%

29.3%

34.9%

Note: Data on series are from the UCLA Hollywood Diversity Reports.23 Because UCLA defines the lead as the first listed individual on
IMDbPro.com, these measures are not directly comparable and thus should be interpreted cautiously.

In terms of series, Netflix significantly outperformed the wider industry across three of the four years
studied. In 2021, 47.2% of Netflix series showcased underrepresented leads/co leads compared to34.9% industry-wide.24 See Table 11.
Beyond leads, we identified every main cast/series regular character across Netflix content. As noted
earlier, main cast characters were those who held a primary or secondary role in a program. In 2021, there
were 1,003 main cast/series regular characters in film and series. Overall, 40.4% (n=405) of the main
cast/series regulars in 2021 were from an underrepresented racial/ethnic group, which is a substantial
increase from 2018 (29.4%). Notably, the greatest increase can be seen from 2018 (29.4%) to 2019 (38.6%)
while subsequent years have shown more modest gains. In 2020 and 2021, Netflix main cast achieved
proportional representation with the U.S. population.25
There was no difference in the percentage of underrepresented main cast characters by format in 2021 (film=
40.1%; series=40.9%). However, across 4 years, the percentage of underrepresented main cast increased
significantly across both formats. Slightly less than one-third (32.3%) of main cast characters were
underrepresented in 2018 films compared to 40.1% in 2021. Series followed a similar pattern, with anincrease of 13.9 percentage points since 2018, from 27% to 40.9%. See Table 12.
Table 12Percentage of Underrepresented Main Cast By Storytelling Format and Year
Format

2018

2019

2020

2021

Films

32.3%
(n=175)38.9%(n=184)42.2%(n=232)40.1%(n=246)

Series27%(n=175)38.4%(n=284)39.5%(n=189)40.9%(n=159)

Total

29.4%
(n=350)38.6%(n=468)41%(n=421)40.4%(n=405)

Page 14

Table 13 illustrates the distribution of main cast by racial/ethnic group overall, and for film and series
separately. In 2021, 59.6% of main cast were White, 16.8% were Black, 7.7% were Hispanic, 6.9% were
Asian, 1.1% were Middle Eastern/North African, <1% were American Indian/Alaskan Native, <1% were Native
Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and 6.9% were Multiracial/Multiethnic. Comparing Netflix underrepresented
main cast with the 2021 U.S. Census, Netflix under indexes on Hispanic/Latino (7.7% vs. 18.9%) main castrepresentation and over indexes for Multiracial/Multiethnic (6.9% vs. 2.9%) main cast portrayal. No othermeaningful differences were observed.
Table 13
Race/Ethnicity of Main Cast in Netflix Films and Series

MeasureFilm

Series

Total

U.S.
Census

White

59.9%
(n=368)59.1%(n=230)59.6%(n=598)59.3%

Black/African American

17.1%(n=105)16.5%(n=64)

16.8%(n=169)13.6%

Hispanic/Latino

6.2%(n=38)

10%(n=39)

7.7%(n=77)

18.9%

Asian

7.7%
(n=47)

5.7%(n=22)

6.9%(n=69)

6.1%

Middle Eastern/
North African

0.5%
(n=3)

2.1%
(n=8)

1.1%
(n=11)

1.1%

American Indian/
Alaskan Native

0.3%
(n=2)

0

0.2%
(n=2)

1.3%

Native Hawaiian/
Pacific Islander

1.3%
(n=8)

0

0.8%
(n=8)

0.3%

Multiracial/Multiethnic7%(n=43)

6.7%(n=26)

6.9%(n=69)

2.9%

Moving from primary and secondary characters to all characters, a total of 3,857 speaking characters were
evaluated for race/ethnicity across Netflix films and scripted series in 2021.26 Overall, 39.8% of all speaking
characters in 2021 were from underrepresented racial/ethnic groups (see Table 14). This is consistent with
U.S. Census figures (40.7%).27 From 2018 (33.6%) to 2021 (39.8%), the percentage of underrepresented

Page 15

speaking characters in Netflix films and series increased by 6.2 percentage points. The strongest year forunderrepresented speaking characters was 2020 (40.4%).
Table 14
Percentage of Underrepresented Speaking Characters By Storytelling Format and Year
Format

2018

2019

2020

2021

Films

35.8%
(n=857)40.2%(n=855)38.3%(n=827)38.5%(n=748)

Series32%(n=1,053)

38%(n=1,468)

42.3%(n=1,031)

41.1%(n=786)

Total

33.6%
(n=1,910)

38.8%(n=2,323)

40.4%(n=1,858)39.8%(n=1,534)

Table 15 features a complete breakdown of characters from each racial/ethnic group by storytelling format.
The majority (60.2%) of the speaking or named characters assessed were White, while 17.3% were Black,
6.5% were Hispanic/Latino, 9.6% were Asian, 1.7% were Middle Eastern/North African, <1% were American
Indian/Alaskan Native, <1% were Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and 4% were Multiracial/Multiethnic.

Page 16

Table 15
Race/Ethnicity of Speaking Characters by Storytelling Format and Year

Measures

Film

SeriesOverall

U.S. Census

White

61.5%
(n=1,196)

58.9%(n=1,127)60.2%(n=2,323)

59.3%

Black/African American

16.5%(n=320)18.1%(n=346)17.3%(n=666)

13.6%

Hispanic/Latino

5.2%(n=102)7.8%(n=149)6.5%(n=251)

18.9%

Asian

11.4%
(n=221)7.9%(n=151)9.6%(n=372)

6.1%

Middle Eastern/North African

0.4%
(n=8)

3%
(n=57)

1.7%(n=65)

1.1%

American Indian/Alaskan Native

0.2%
(n=3)

0.1%
(n=1)

0.1%
(n=4)

1.3%

Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander

0.8%(n=15)

0.3%
(n=6)

0.5%
(n=21)

0.3%

Multiracial/Multiethnic

4.1%(n=79)

4%(n=76)

4%(n=155)

2.9%

Turning to each format, no difference was observed for film in the representation of underrepresented
speaking characters from 2018 to 2021. See Table 16. Series, however, had significantly more
underrepresented characters in 2021 than in 2018. Netflix gains are similar to an overall upward industry
trajectory for underrepresented characters in episodic series. As shown in Table 16, Netflix has kept pacewith its peers across the four years studied.

Page 17

Table 16
Percentage of Underrepresented Speaking Characters in Netflix & Industry Films and Series by Year
Film

Series

Year
2018

2019

2020

2021

2018

2019

2020

2021

% of
underrepresented
speaking characters,
Netflix

35.8%

40.2%

38.3%

38.5%

32%

38%

42.3%

41.1%

% of
underrepresented
speaking characters,industry

36.3%

34.3%

42%

39.7%

33.9%

36.9%

40.8%

45.3%

Note: The film industry comparisons in 2018, 2019, and 2021 are from the Annenberg Inclusion Initiative.28 Series comparisons and film
data from 2020 are from the UCLA Hollywood Diversity Reports.29

Another way to examine the prevalence of underrepresented characters is to assess how many stories
achieved proportional representation. For this metric, we defined proportional representation as 36.6%
or more underrepresented characters in a program. This percentage is calculated to be 10% below the
U.S. population metric of 40.7%.30 In 2021, the overall percentage of scripted Netflix content that was at
or above proportional representation was 46.6%. This is a substantial increase from 2018 where only
30.2% of all scripted content reached or exceeded proportional representation. Notably, in 2020 morethan half of Netflix films and series (53.3%) were at proportional representation.
Pivoting to focus on each format, there was little difference between film (46.2%) and series (47.2%) in 2021.
Over time, both formats significantly increased the percentage of stories meeting proportional
representation. See Table 17.

Page 18

Table 17
Stories At or Above Proportional Representation by Storytelling Medium and Year
Medium

2018

2019

2020

2021

Total

Film

37.7%
(n=26)

49.1%(n=28)

55.2%(n=32)

46.2%(n=30)

46.6%(n=116)

Scripted Series

23.8%(n=19)

45%(n=45)

51.6%(n=33)

47.2%(n=25)

41.1%(n=122)Overall30.2%(n=45)

46.5%(n=73)

53.3%(n=65)

46.6%(n=55)

43.6%(n=238)The final metric that provides insight into the presence of underrepresented characters is invisibility. As
shown in Table 18, we examined the percentage of stories without any characters from each racial/ethnic
group by medium. Overall, only 3 stories (2.5%) were missing any White characters while 98.3% and 94.9%
were without American Indian/Alaskan Native and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander characters, respectively.
Asian characters were absent in just under a third of films and series while Hispanic/Latino characters wereabsent in slightly less than half of Netflix stories. Of 118 Netflix stories, 9 stories were missing Black/African
American characters.
Table 18
Stories Erasing Speaking Characters of Specific Racial/Ethnic Groups
Measures

White

Black

H/L

Asian

MENA

AI/AN

NH/PI

Multi

Films without
speaking
characters

3.1%
(n=2)

10.8%
(n=7)

47.7%
(n=31)

33.8%(n=22)

90.8%(n=59)

98.5%(n=64)

93.8%(n=61)

47.7%(n=31)

Series without
speaking
characters

1.9%
(n=1)

3.8%
(n=2)

41.5%
(n=22)

24.5%(n=13)

73.6%(n=39)

98.1%(n=52)

96.2%(n=51)

34%(n=18)

Total

2.5%
(n=3)

7.6%
(n=9)

44.9%
(n=53)

29.7%(n=35)

83.1%(n=98)

98.3%(n=116)94.9%(n=112)41.5%(n=49)

Note: H/L refers to Hispanic/Latino; AI/AN refers to American Indian/Alaskan Native; NHPI refers to Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander;
MENA refers to Middle Eastern/North African; and Multi refers to Multiracial/Multiethnic.

Page 19

Summarizing the on-screen findings for race/ethnicity Netflix has reached proportional representation
overall for leads/co leads, main cast/series regulars, and all speaking characters. Despite these findings,
there are still stories where individuals from specific racial/ethnic groups are missing on screen. Given theincreases observed on screen for underrepresented characters, it is important to explore whether those areaccompanied by changes behind the camera. In the next section, we examine the race/ethnicity of creatives
working behind the scenes.

Behind the Camera: Film
A total of 413 behind-the-camera personnel across 65 Netflix films were evaluated for race/ethnicity in
2021.31 Overall, 82.6% (n=341) were White and 17.4% (n=72) were from underrepresented racial/ethnic
groups (see Table 19).
Of 67 film directors in 2021, 77.6% (n=52) were White and 22.4% (n=15) were from underrepresented
racial/ethnic groups. In other words, there were 3.5 White directors for every 1 underrepresented director.
Table 19 features the percentage of underrepresented personnel above the line in Netflix films by year. There
were significantly more underrepresented directors in 2021 than in 2018, although the highest percentage
of underrepresented directors occurred in 2020.
Table 19
Percentage Of Underrepresented Personnel Above the Line in Film By Year
Measures

2018

2019

2020

2021

Directors

16.7%(n=12)

17.2%(n=10)

30%(n=18)

22.4%(n=15)

Writers13.9%(n=14)

19%(n=19)

24.2%(n=24)

17%(n=18)

Producers

14.7%(n=37)

10.6%(n=19)

18.5%(n=37)

16.2%(n=39)

Total

14.8%
(n=63)

14.2%(n=48)

22%(n=79)

17.4%(n=72)Breaking down the percentage of 2021 film directors by race/ethnicity, 77.6% were White, 4.5% wereBlack/African American, 7.5% were Hispanic/Latino, 3% were Asian, 1.5% were Middle Eastern/North
African, and 6% were Multiracial/Multiethnic. No film directors in 2021 were American Indian/Alaskan Nativeor Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander.
In comparison to top-grossing films, Netflix has had both significantly more (2020) and significantly less(2018) underrepresented directors over time.32 In 2021, the difference between Netflix and top movies did
not reach a meaningful difference of 5 percentage points or greater. See Figure 9.

Page 20

Figure 9
Percentage of Underrepresented Directors by Type of Distributor and YearOf 106 credited film writers in 2021, 83% (n=88) were White and 17% (n=18) were from underrepresented
racial/ethnic groups. The percentage of underrepresented writers did not change from 2018 to 2021, though
the high point occurred in 2020 (24.2%).
Figure 10 compares the percentage of underrepresented writers between Netflix films and top-grossing
films.33 In 2021, there was no difference between the percentage of underrepresented writers of Netflix films
and those of top-grossing movies.
Figure 10
Percentage of Underrepresented Writers by Type of Distributor and Year

Looking at the specific racial/ethnic breakdown of writers in 2021, 83% were White, 3.8% were Black/African
American, 2.8% were Hispanic/Latino, 2.8% were Asian, <1% were Middle Eastern/North African, and 6.6%
were Multiracial/Multiethnic. There were no writers identified as American Indian/Alaskan Native or Native
Hawaiian/Pacific Islander.
Turning to Netflix film producers, 240 producers were examined across the sample of 2021 content. The
majority (83.8%, n=201) were White while 16.2% (n=39) were from underrepresented racial/ethnic groups.
The percentage of underrepresented producers in 2021 was not meaningfully different from 2018. As shown

Page 21

in Figure 11, the percentage of underrepresented producers in top-grossing films and in Netflix content
reached similar levels in 2021.34
Figure 11
Percentage of Underrepresented Producers by Type of Distributor and YearOf the producers of Netflix films, 83.8% were White, 6.2% were Black/African American, 2.1% wereHispanic/Latino, 3.3% were Asian, <1% were Middle Eastern/North African, and 4.2% were
Multiracial/Multiethnic. American Indian/Alaskan Native and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander producers did
not work on Netflix films in 2021.
We also examined whether having an underrepresented creative behind the scenes was related to who
appears on-screen in Netflix films. We divided the sample into two categories: films with at least one
underrepresented director and films with only White directors. Then we assessed the percentage ofunderrepresented leads/co leads, main cast, and speaking characters for the films in each group. We
repeated the process for writers and producers.
See Table 20 for a complete breakdown. Films with an underrepresented director attached were significantly
more likely to feature underrepresented leads/co-leads (86.4% vs. 39.7%), underrepresented main cast(75.2% vs. 31.4%), and underrepresented speaking characters (61.9% vs. 30.6%).

Page 22

Table 20
Percentage of Underrepresented Leads/Co-Leads, Main Cast & Speaking Characters in Film byUnderrepresented Status
Directors
Underrepresented
Role

Writers

Producers

UR
Director

No UR
Director

UR
Writer

No UR
WriterUR
Producer

No UR
Producer

Leads/Co-Leads

86.4%(n=19)

39.7%(n=31)

85.7%(n=18)

40.5%(n=32)

83.3%(n=30)

31.2%(n=20)

Main Cast

75.2%(n=91)

31.4%(n=155)72.3%(n=73)

33.7%(n=173)65.4%(n=125)28.6%(n=121)

Speaking Characters61.9%(n=302)30.6%(n=446)65.8%(n=269)31.2%(n=479)53.7%(n=369)30.2%(n=379)Similarly, films with an underrepresented writer were associated with more underrepresented leads/coleads (85.7% vs. 40.5%), main cast members (72.3% vs. 33.7%), and speaking characters (65.8% vs. 31.2%).
Furthermore, Netflix films were more likely to be inclusive in terms of casting when an underrepresented
producer was attached (leads/co-leads, 83.3% vs. 31.2%; main cast, 65.4% vs. 28.6%; speaking characters,
53.7% vs. 30.2%).
In summary, while the percentage of underrepresented directors has increased over time across Netflix
movies, this trend was not seen for writers and producers. However, underrepresented creatives were
responsible for the bulk of on-screen racial/ethnic inclusion seen in Netflix films. This suggests that there is
still more room for White content creators to improve casting to reach proportional representation,
particularly for main cast and speaking characters.

Behind the Camera: Series
Next, we assessed the creators, producers, writers, and directors across every episode of Netflix series inthe sample. A total of 2,093 personnel behind the camera across 53 Netflix series in 2021 were evaluated forrace/ethnicity. Overall, 74% (n=1,548) were White and 26% (n=545) were from underrepresented
racial/ethnic groups (see Table 21). There was a significant increase in underrepresented content creators
in Netflix series in from 2018 (14.9%) to 2021 (26%).

Page 23

Table 21
Percentage Of Underrepresented Personnel Above-The-Line In Series By Year
Measures

2018

2019

2020

2021

Creators

7.6%
(n=9)

15.9%
(n=23)

12.6%(n=13)

21.4%(n=18)

Producers

12.9%(n=93)

16.9%(n=147)15.1%(n=100)18.6%(n=97)

Writers13.9%(n=168)20.3%(n=290)19.3%(n=151)27.6%(n=270)

Directors

19.6%(n=149)21.2%(n=192)26.5%(n=142)31.4%(n=160)

Total

14.9%
(n=420)19.5%(n=652)19.5%(n=406)26%(n=545)

Of 84 series creators in 2021, 78.6% (n=66) were White and 21.4% (n=18) were from an underrepresented
racial/ethnic group. This is a ratio of 3.7 White creators for every 1 underrepresented creator. Table 21
illustrates the percentage of underrepresented series creators over time. There was a substantial increasein underrepresented creators across the four years. The broader entertainment industry has also seen an
increase in underrepresented creators over time. As shown in Figure 12, Netflix is not significantly different
from its industry peers on this measure.35
Figure 12
Percentage of Underrepresented Series Creators by Type of Distributor and Year

Page 24

The specific racial/ethnic breakdown for creators in 2021 was: 78.6% White, 8.3% Black/African American,
2.4% Hispanic/Latino, 4.8% Asian, 2.4% Middle Eastern/North African, and 3.6% Multiracial/Multiethnic.
There were no series creators of American Indian/Alaskan Native or Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander
heritage.
Across all Netflix series producers in 2021, 81.4% (n=425) were White and 18.6% (n=97) were from anunderrepresented racial/ethnic group. There was a meaningful increase for underrepresented producers
over time (Table 21), with 2021 (18.6%) significantly higher than 2018 (12.9%). Of 522 series producers, 81.4%(n=425) were White, 6.9% were Black/African American, 3.1% were Hispanic/Latino, 4% were Asian, 1%
were Middle Eastern/North African and 3.6% were Multiracial/Multiethnic. There were no producers who
were American Indian/Alaskan Native or Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander.
Moving to writers, 72.4% (n=707) were White and 27.6% (n=270) were from an underrepresented
racial/ethnic group. Since 2018, there have been significantly more underrepresented Netflix series writers,
including an increase from 2020 (19.3%) to 2021 (27.6%). Compared to the wider industry (see Figure 13),
Netflix has generally worked with a lower percentage of underrepresented writers during the time period
examined.36
Figure 13
Percentage of Underrepresented Writers by Type of Distributor and Year

Breaking down the percentage of series writers by race/ethnicity, 72.4% were White, 11.6% wereBlack/African American, 4.4% were Hispanic/Latino, 5% were Asian, <1% were Middle Eastern/North
African, and 6% were Multiracial/Multiethnic. As with creators and producers, no American Indian/Alaskan
Native or Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander writers worked in the 2021 sample, though 1 Indigenous writer
was credited in 2020.
Finally, we examined 510 directors across Netflix series. The majority 68.6% (n=350) were White and 31.4%(n=160) were from an underrepresented racial/ethnic group. Netflix was on a positive trajectory in terms ofhiring directors of color from 2018 (19.6%) to 2021 (31.4%).

Page 25

Figure 14
Percentage of Underrepresented Directors by Type of Distributor and Year

DGA data on all episodic directors was used to compare Netflix to its industry counterparts. From 2018 to2020, Netflix fell significantly below overall industry figures in 2 years (2019, 2020). However, in 2021, Netflix
was not meaningfully different from the wider industry.37 See Figure 14.
Looking at the specific racial/ethnic breakdown of directors, 68.6% were White, 13.1% were Black/African
American, 5.9% were Hispanic/Latino, 4.9% were Asian, 1.2% were Middle Eastern/North African and 6.3%
were Multiracial/Multiethnic. The only American Indian/Alaskan Native directors across Netflix series
worked on episodes in 2019.
As with Netflix films, we examined the relationship between underrepresented creatives behind the scenes
across the first three episodes of Netflix series and the on-screen inclusion profile. We created two
categories: series with at least one underrepresented creator attached and series with no underrepresented
creator attached. Then, we compared the percentage of underrepresented main cast members and speaking
characters on screen across these two groups.
Table 22
Percentage of Underrepresented Main Cast & Speaking Characters in Series
by Underrepresented Status of Creator

Underrepresented Role

UR Creator Attached

No UR Creator Attached

Main Cast/Series Regulars

79%(n=64)

32.5%(n=94)

Speaking Characters

63.5%(n=292)36.1%(n=484)As Table 22 shows, when at least one underrepresented creator was attached to a story, it was more likely
to feature underrepresented series regular members (79% vs. 32.5%) and underrepresented speaking

Page 26

characters (63.5% vs. 36.1%). Once again, creators of color were primarily responsible for more
underrepresented series regulars and characters.
Overall, Netflix demonstrated gains for underrepresented creators, producers, writers, and directors acrossits series. These gains allowed Netflix to keep pace with larger industry hiring practices, though not outstrip
them. As in film, underrepresented creatives were largely responsible for the presence of underrepresented
main cast and speaking characters. Given the findings throughout this section, one remaining question iswhether the gains for underrepresented individuals in Netflix content have benefitted bothunderrepresented men and women. In the next section, we shift our focus to examine girls and women ofcolor in Netflix films and series.
WOMEN OF COLOR

In addition to examining gender and underrepresented status independently across Netflix content, it isessential to look at patterns through a lens of intersectionality. Given the historical underrepresentation andmarginalization of women of color, the next section focuses on underrepresented females across Netflix
programs.

On Screen: Film & Series
The percentage of underrepresented female leads/co leads was examined. Films with at least one
underrepresented female protagonist and series with a minimum of 20% underrepresented female series
regulars were considered to have an underrepresented female lead/co lead. This benchmark was chosen as
it reflects the U.S. population, of which 20% are underrepresented girls/women.38
Table 23
Percentage of UR Female-Led/Co Led Programs by Storytelling Format and Year
Measures

2018

2019

2020

2021

Total

Film

15.9%
(n=11)

22.8%(n=13)

27.6%(n=16)

27.7%(n=18)

23.3%(n=58)

Series35.4%(n=28)

47.9%(n=46)

43.5%(n=27)

54.7%(n=29)

44.8%(n=130)Overall26.4%(n=39)

38.6%(n=59)

35.8%(n=43)

39.8%(n=47)

34.9%(n=188)Across all Netflix films and scripted series in 2021, 39.8% (n=47) depicted underrepresented female
leads/co leads. As shown in Table 23, 2021 had significantly more stories with an underrepresented female
lead/co lead than 2018 (26.4%).
An overall increase for underrepresented female leads/co leads occurred across film and series. In 2021,
27.7% of films had a girl or woman of color as the lead/co lead, significantly more than 2018 (15.9%). In

Page 27

2021, Netflix films also featured more underrepresented female leads/co leads than top-grossing films(11%).39
Turning to series, more than half in 2021 (54.7%) had underrepresented female leads/co leads, whereas justover one-third of series were led by girls/women of color in 2018 (35.4%). See Table 23. With the increases
observed across films and series, Netflix content featured underrepresented female leads/co leads at agreater percentage than U.S. population figures for underrepresented girls and women. 40
Across film and series in 2021, there were 91 underrepresented female lead/co lead characters. Of thosecharacters, 38.5% were Black/African American, 14.3% were Hispanic/Latina, 16.5% were Asian, 1.1% were
Middle Eastern/North African, 2.2% were Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and 27.5% were
Multiracial/Multiethnic. No underrepresented female lead/co lead characters were American Indian/Alaska
Native.
We also examined main cast/series regulars, or the extent to which women/girls of color filled leading andsupporting roles in the plot of films and series. Slightly less than one-third (31.2%) of 1,000 main cast/series
regular characters in 2021 were White males, 28.4% were White females, 21.8% were underrepresented
males, and 18.6% were underrepresented females. As shown in Table 24, girls and women of color comprise
20% of the U.S. population.41 Thus, in 2021, Netflix content approached proportional representation in its
casting of underrepresented females in key roles.
Table 24
Percentage of Main Cast by Underrepresented Status and Storytelling format: 2021

Measures

Film

SeriesOverallU.S.
CensusWhite Males31%(n=190)31.5%(n=122)31.2%(n=312)30%

White Females

28.9%(n=177)27.6%(n=107)28.4%(n=284)30%

UR Males22.2%(n=136)21.2%(n=82)

21.8%(n=218)20%

UR Females

17.9%(n=110)19.6%(n=76)

18.6%(n=186)

20%

613

387

1,000

~330
million

Total

Note: There were 3 nonbinary main cast actors in 2021, 1 of whom was underrepresented and appeared in series. These actors
were not included in the analysis above.

Page 28

There was no significant difference between film and series in 2021 in the percentage of underrepresented
female main cast characters. Across both formats, there was an increase in underrepresented female main
cast characters from 2018 to 2019. These gains held into 2021. See Table 25. In 2021, the percentage ofunderrepresented female main cast in Netflix content aligned with both top-grossing films (14.8%) and thewider industry for episodic series (20%).42
Table 25
Percentage of Main Cast by Underrepresented Status, Storytelling format, and Year
Film

SeriesMeasures
2018

2019

2020

2021

2018

2019

2020

2021

% of White
Male Main
Cast

40.2%
(n=218)37.2%(n=176)34.3%(n=188)31%(n=190)40.2%(n=260)32.8%(n=242)29.7%(n=142)31.5%(n=122)% of White
FemaleMain Cast

27.5%(n=149)23.9%(n=113)23.4%(n=128)28.9%(n=177)32.8%(n=212)28.9%(n=213)30.8%(n=147)27.6%(n=107)% of UR
Male Main
Cast

20.5%
(n=111)21.8%(n=103)24.8%(n=136)22.2%(n=136)13.3%(n=86)

19.2%(n=142)21.3%(n=102)21.2%(n=82)% of UR
FemaleMain Cast

11.8%(n=64)

17.1%(n=81)

17.5%(n=96)

17.9%(n=110)13.8%(n=89)

19.1%(n=141)

18.2%(n=87)

19.6%(n=76)

Across all Netflix programs in 2021, 35.5% of speaking characters were White males, 24.7% were White
females, 22.6% were underrepresented males, and 17.2% were underrepresented females (see Table 26).
There was no change over time in the percentage of underrepresented female speaking characters.

Page 29

Table 26
Percentage of Overall Speaking Characters by Underrepresented Status by Year
Measures

2018

2019

2020

2021

% of White Male Speaking Characters

41.3%(n=2,350)

38.1%(n=2,285)

36.8%(n=1,690)

35.5%(n=1,370)% of White Female Speaking Characters

25.1%(n=1,424)

23.1%(n=1,384)

22.8%(n=1,047)

24.7%(n=951)% of UR Male Speaking Characters

20%(n=1,137)

22.2%(n=1,328)

22.6%(n=1,039)

22.6%(n=871)% of UR Female Speaking Characters

13.6%(n=773)16.6%(n=994)17.8%(n=819)17.2%(n=662)

By format, film (16%) and series (18.4%) in 2021 did not differ in the proportion of underrepresented female
speaking characters (see Table 27). Across both films and series, the percentage of underrepresented
females approached 20%, or proportional representation to the U.S. population.43
There was no significant change over time for underrepresented female film characters. In 2021, thepercentage of underrepresented female speaking characters in Netflix films (16%) was similar to topgrossing movies (14.6%).44 For Netflix series, there was a significant increase from 2018 (13.2%) to 2021
(18.4%) in the percentage of underrepresented female speaking characters. Looking to the wider industry,
19.4% of speaking characters in episodic series in 2020/21 were girls/women of color, which is not different
than the percentage in Netflix content.45

Page 30

Table 27
Percentage of Speaking Characters by Underrepresented Status, Storytelling Format, and Year
Film

SeriesMeasure
2018

2019

2020

2021

2018

2019

2020

2021

% of WhiteMale
Speaking
Characters

41.8%(n=999)38.8%(n=824)38.3%(n=826)36.4%(n=708)41%(n=1,351)

37.8%(n=1,461)

35.5%(n=864)34.6%(n=662)% of White
FemaleSpeaking
Characters

22.4%(n=536)21%(n=446)23.4%(n=505)25.1%(n=487)27%(n=888)24.3%(n=938)22.2%(n=542)24.3%(n=464)% of UR
Male
Speaking
Characters

21.7%(n=518)24.7%(n=524)22.3%(n=481)22.5%(n=438)18.8%(n=619)20.8%(n=804)22.9%(n=558)22.7%(n=433)% of UR
FemaleSpeaking
Characters

14.2%(n=339)15.6%(n=331)16%(n=346)16%(n=310)13.2%(n=434)17.1%(n=663)19.4%(n=473)18.4%(n=352)Another indicator of inclusive storytelling is invisibility, or the absence of underrepresented female speaking
characters from specific racial/ethnic groups. Table 28 depicts the number and percentage of Netflix films
and scripted series in 2021 without even one speaking/named female character from each specificracial/ethnic group. In other words, this measure reveals how often girls and women from specificracial/ethnic groups are rendered invisible in Netflix programs.

Page 31

Table 28
Percentage & Number of Stories Missing Females by Racial/Ethnic Group: 2021
Measures

White

Black

H/L

Asian

AI/AN

NH/PI

ME/NA

Multi

Films

9.2%
(n=6)

27.7%
(n=18)

66.2%(n=43)

55.4%(n=36)

98.5%(n=64)

95.4%(n=62)

96.9%(n=63)

60%(n=39)

Series

5.7%
(n=3)

13.2%
(n=7)

56.6%
(n=30)

37.7%(n=20)

100%(n=53)

98.1%(n=52)

90.6%(n=48)

56.6%(n=30)

Total

7.6%
(n=9)

21.2%
(n=25)

61.9%(n=73)

47.5%(n=56)

99.2%(n=117)96.6%(n=114)94.1%(n=111)

58.5%(n=69)

Nearly all programs failed to include American Indian/Alaskan Native, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, andMiddle Eastern/North African girls and women. Nearly two-thirds were missing Latinas, and more than halfof films and series were missing Multiracial/Multiethnic female characters. Slightly less than half of stories
failed to include an Asian female, while 21.2% were missing Black girls/women. Only 7.6% of stories were
missing White female characters. There were some differences between films and series. A higher
percentage of films than series were missing Black, Hispanic/Latino, Asian, and Middle Eastern/North
African female characters.
Overall, Netflix has increased representation of girls and women of color as leads/co leads and main castsince 2018. Gains for underrepresented female speaking characters were observed in series, though not infilm. In addition, across leads/co leads, main cast, and speaking characters, the proportion ofunderrepresented females reflects the U.S. population. Despite these findings, for women from someracial/ethnic groups, invisibility remains an issue.

Behind the Scenes: Film
It is important to look at intersectional representation both on screen and behind the scenes. Thus, we
examined the prevalence of underrepresented women as directors, writers, and producers in film and acrosscreators, producers, writers, and directors in series.
Beginning with film directors, in 2021, 6% or 4 directors were underrepresented women. Two of these
women were Asian and two were Multiracial. The percentage of underrepresented women directors in Netflix
films has not changed over time.

Page 32

Table 29
Netflix Film Directors by Underrepresented Status, Gender, and Year
Measures

2018

2019

2020

2021

White Males

63.9%(n=46)

69%(n=40)

60%(n=36)

56.7%(n=38)White Females

19.4%(n=14)

13.8%
(n=8)

10%
(n=6)

20.9%
(n=14)UR Males

11.1%
(n=8)

10.3%
(n=6)

23.3%
(n=14)

16.4%(n=11)UR Females

5.6%
(n=4)

6.9%
(n=4)

6.7%
(n=4)

6%
(n=4)

Figure 15 presents a comparison between Netflix films and top-grossing movies in terms ofunderrepresented women directors.46 Across the four years, Netflix and top-grossing movies had a similar
percentage of underrepresented women directors.

Figure 15
Percentage of Underrepresented Women Directors by Type of Distributor and Year

Turning to film writers, 5.7% were underrepresented women in 2021. The percentage of underrepresented
women writers in Netflix films did not change over time (Table 30). In 2021, 4.6% of top-grossing film writers
were women of color, which is comparable to Netflix films in the same year.47

Page 33

Table 30
Netflix Film Writers by Underrepresented Status, Gender, and Year
Measures

2018

2019

2020

2021

White Males

61.4%(n=62)

63%(n=63)

59.6%(n=59)

55.7%(n=59)White Females

24.8%(n=25)

18%(n=18)

16.2%(n=16)

27.4%(n=29)UR Males10.9%(n=11)

14%(n=14)

18.2%(n=18)

11.3%(n=12)UR Females

3%
(n=3)

5%
(n=5)

6.1%
(n=6)

5.7%
(n=6)

Lastly, across Netflix film producers in 2021, 5.8% were underrepresented women. As shown in Table 31,
there was no change for underrepresented women producers over time. As with directors and writers, thepercentage of underrepresented women producers in Netflix content in 2021 was similar to top-grossing
movies (4.6%).48
Table 31
Netflix Film Producers by Underrepresented Status, Gender, and Year
Measures

2018

2019

2020

2021

White Males

63.1%(n=159)64.2%(n=115)58.5%(n=117)60.4%(n=145)White Females

22.2%(n=56)

25.1%(n=45)

23%(n=46)

23.3%(n=56)UR Males8.3%(n=21)

6.1%(n=11)

11.5%(n=23)

10.4%(n=25)UR Females

6.3%(n=16)

4.5%
(n=8)

7%
(n=14)

5.8%(n=14)

Page 34

Behind the Scenes: Series
For series, we examined creators through an intersectional lens. In 2021, 9.5% of series creators were
underrepresented women. Five of these women were Black, 1 was Hispanic/Latina, 1 was Asian, and 1 wasMultiracial. The percentage of underrepresented women creators in 2021 was significantly greater than in
2018. These underrepresented women were affiliated with 8 series in 2021, compared to just 3 series in 2018.
There were no available industry comparisons for women of color working as creators in episodic series.
Table 32
Netflix Series Creators by Underrepresented Status, Gender, and Year
Measures

2018

2019

2020

2021

White Males

68.6%(n=81)

56.6%(n=82)

65.7%(n=67)

50%(n=42)White Females

23.7%(n=28)

27.6%(n=40)

21.6%(n=22)

28.6%(n=24)UR Males

5.1%
(n=6)

11%
(n=16)

8.8%
(n=9)

11.9%
(n=10)UR Females

2.5%
(n=3)

4.8%
(n=7)

3.9%
(n=4)

9.5%
(n=8)

Less than 10% of series producers in 2021 were underrepresented women (7.9%), a percentage which did
not vary over time (see Table 33). There were no available industry comparisons for women of color as series
producers in 2021.

Page 35

Table 33
Netflix Series Producers by Underrepresented Status, Gender, and Year
Measures

2018

2019

2020

2021

White Males

58.9%(n=424)50.2%(n=437)53.8%(n=357)51.1%(n=267)White Females

28.2%(n=203)32.9%(n=286)31.1%(n=206)30.3%(n=158)UR Males7.6%(n=55)

10.1%(n=88)

7.7%(n=51)

10.7%(n=56)UR Females

5.3%(n=38)

6.8%(n=59)

7.4%(n=49)

7.9%(n=41)

Turning to series writers, 13.8% were underrepresented women in 2021. There was a steady gain from 2018that culminated in a significant increase in 2021. See Table 34.
Table 34
Netflix Series Writers by Underrepresented Status, Gender, and Year
Measures

2018

2019

2020

2021

White Males

63.6%(n=768)47.5%(n=678)53.3%(n=415)45.2%(n=441)White Females

22.5%(n=271)32.2%(n=459)27.2%(n=212)27.2%(n=265)UR Males

5.8%(n=70)

11.2%(n=160)6.8%(n=53)

13.8%(n=135)

UR Females

8.1%(n=98)

9.1%(n=130)12.6%(n=98)

13.8%(n=135)

In comparison to the broader industry (14.3%), Netflix employed a similar percentage of women of color
writers on its series in 2021.49 Over the past 4 years, Netflix has not varied significantly from the industry. See
Figure 16.

Page 36Figure 16
Percentage of Underrepresented Women Writers by Type of Distributor and Year

Turning to directors in 2021, 11.8% were underrepresented women. The percentage of underrepresented
women directors increased between 2018 and 2021 from 5.6% to 11.8%. However, the high point wasreached in 2020 when 13.5% of directors were underrepresented women.
Table 35
Netflix Series Directors by Underrepresented Status, Gender, and Year
Measures

2018

2019

2020

2021

White Males61%(n=465)54.9%(n=496)48.8%(n=261)43.7%(n=223)

White Females

19.4%(n=148)23.9%(n=216)24.7%(n=132)24.9%(n=127)UR Males13.9%(n=106)15.2%(n=137)13.1%(n=70)

19.6%(n=100)UR Females

5.6%(n=43)

6.1%(n=55)

13.5%(n=72)

11.8%(n=60)As a point of comparison, 13% of directors in the 2020/21 season were underrepresented women, according
to the DGA.50 Across 3 of the last 4 years, Netflix has not differed from its industry counterparts when it
comes to hiring underrepresented women directors (see Figure 17).

Page 37

Figure 17
Percentage of Underrepresented Women Directors by Type of Distributor and YearIn summary, in 2021, women of color working behind the scenes on Netflix series saw significant gains ascreators, writers, and directors. On the film side, while there was little change at Netflix for women of color,
this was also true of the broader film industry. These changes behind the camera provide an important
context for the on screen increases reported earlier for underrepresented females.
SPECIFIC RACIAL/ETHNIC GROUPSIn the previous sections, we explored the overall prevalence of characters from underrepresented
racial/ethnic groups. Now, we look to understand more deeply the prevalence of cast and crew from eachspecific racial/ethnic group. This allows for comparisons to U.S. population data—which was used todetermine leads/co leads across series—and identifies gaps in representation and employment.
In the analysis that follows, we examined leads/co leads and main cast actors who were Black/African
American (yes, no), Asian (yes, no), Latinx (yes, no), Middle Eastern/North African (yes, no), American
Indian/Alaskan Native (yes, no), and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (yes, no). Leads/co leads and main
cast actors51 who were Multiracial/Multiethnic were recategorized into all groups with which they identified.

Black Cast & Crew. To determine if a program had a Black lead/co lead, we examined whether one or morefilm protagonists was Black or whether at least 13% of series regular actors were Black, in line withpopulation data.52 In 2021, 39% of all Netflix films and series featured a Black lead/co lead, significantly
more than the percentage of programs in 2018. In 2021, more than a quarter of films and more than half ofseries had a Black lead/co lead. These figures represent a meaningful increase from 2018 for both films53 andseries.

Page 38

Table 36
Black Leads/Co Leads by Storytelling Medium and Year
Format

2018

2019

2020

2021

Total

Film

20.3%
(n=14)

22.8%(n=13)

27.6%(n=16)

26.2%(n=17)

24.1%(n=60)

Series45.6%(n=36)

48.5%(n=47)

56.5%(n=35)

54.7%(n=29)

50.5%(n=147)

Total

33.8%
(n=50)

39%(n=60)

42.5%(n=51)

39%(n=46)

38.3%(n=207)Turning to series regular/main cast actors, 20.3% of all main cast were Black in 2021. There was nodifference over time in the percentage of Black main cast; after a high point in 2019, there was a nonmeaningful decline each year to 2021.
Although there was no sustained change over time for film, Netflix movies in 2020 had significantly more
Black cast than 2018 or 2021. In series, 21.1% of main cast actors were Black in 2021 compared to 14.8% in
2018, though 2021 was on par with 2019. See Table 37.
Table 37
Black Main Cast by Storytelling Medium and Year
Format

2018

2019

2020

2021

Film

17.9%
(n=99)

24.2%(n=115)25%(n=137)19.8%(n=123)

Series14.8%(n=100)21.8%(n=171)17.9%(n=88)

21.1%(n=87)

Total

16.2%
(n=199)22.7%(n=286)21.6%(n=225)20.3%(n=210)Behind the camera, in 2021, 7.5% of Netflix film directors were Black, as were 5.7% of writers, and 8.8% of
producers. The Black directors in 2021 were: David Oyelowo, Antoine Fuqua, Jeymes Samuel, Rebecca Hall,and Halle Berry. There was no significant change from 2018 to 2021 across any of these positions. However,2020 was the high water-mark across all four years; films in 2020 had significantly more Black directors,
writers, and producers than movies in 2018. See Table 38.

Page 39

Table 38
Percentage of Black Above-the-Line Film Personnel by Year
Format

2018

2019

2020

2021

Directors

6.9%
(n=5)

12.1%
(n=7)

16.7%
(n=10)

7.5%(n=5)

Writers

5%
(n=5)

11%
(n=11)

12.1%(n=12)

5.7%(n=6)

Producers

5.2%(n=13)

5%
(n=9)

10.5%
(n=21)

8.8%(n=21)

Did having Black individuals in creative positions influence on screen casting patterns? The evidence
suggests that it did. Across the full 4-year sample, we created two categories: films with at least one Black
director and films with no Black directors. Films with at least one Black director had significantly more Black
leads/co leads and main cast actors. See Figure 18.
This pattern also held when a Black screenwriter worked on a film: 83.3% of films with a Black writer had aBlack lead/co lead compared to 15.8% of films when no Black writers were attached. Similarly, 64% of main
cast actors were Black in films with one or more Black screenwriters compared to 17.6% in films without aBlack screenwriter. The pattern also held for Black producers.54
Figure 18
Relationship between Black Directors and Black Leads/Co Leads and Main Cast

Turning to Netflix series, 9.5% of creators in 2021 were Black, a 4-year high and significantly greater thanthe 2.5% of creators who were Black in 2018. These Black creators were Jamie Foxx, Regina Y. Hicks, Wanda
Sykes, Meg DeLoatch, Justin Simien, Rheeqrheeq Chainey, Ava DuVernay, and Colin Kaepernick. They were
responsible for a total of 6 series. A total of 7.5% of producers in Netflix series were Black, which did not

Page 40

change meaningfully over time. Of all writers in 2021, 13.7% were Black. This was a sample-wide high point
and a significant increase from 2018. Finally, 16.3% of Netflix series directors in 2021 were Black, theculmination of a 4-year increase from 2018. See Table 39.
Table 39
Percentage of Black Above-the-Line Series Personnel by Year
Format

2018

2019

2020

2021

Creators

2.5%
(n=3)

9.7%
(n=14)

3.9%
(n=4)

9.5%
(n=8)

Producers

3.9%(n=28)

7%(n=61)

6.4%(n=42)

7.5%(n=39)

Writers

5.7%(n=69)

11%(n=157)8.3%(n=65)

13.7%(n=134)

Directors

7.1%(n=54)

11.2%(n=101)12.7%(n=68)

16.3%(n=83)

Similar to the analysis for film, Black series creators were more likely to feature Black main cast actors on
screen. Across all four years evaluated, 73.8% of main cast actors were Black in series with one or more
Black creators, compared to 15.4% in series with no Black creators. As was the case in film, when Black
individuals were responsible for developing Netflix series, they ensured these stories reflected theircommunity. However, even when no Black creator was present, representation of Black cast still exceeded
proportional representation.

Asian Cast & Crew. Asian lead/co leads were evaluated. This included films with at least one Asian
protagonist and series in which 6% or more of the series regulars were Asian. The percentage for series waschosen to align with the percentage of Asians in the U.S. population.55 Across Netflix films and series in 2021,
25.4% of leads/co leads were Asian. There was no longitudinal change from 2018 to 2021.
There was a significant and linear increase in the percentage of Asian film leads/co leads, from 5.8% in 2018
to 12.3% in 2021.56 In series, the percentage of Asian leads/co leads grew between 2018 (35.4%) and 2021
(41.5%), though it was highest in 2020 (45.2%).

Page 41

Table 40
Asian Leads/Co Leads by Storytelling Medium and Year
Format

2018

2019

2020

2021

Total

Film

5.8%
(n=4)

8.8%
(n=5)

10.3%
(n=6)

12.3%
(n=8)

9.2%
(n=23)

Series35.4%(n=28)

40.2%(n=39)

45.2%(n=28)

41.5%(n=22)

40.2%(n=117)

Total

21.6%
(n=32)

28.6%(n=44)

28.3%(n=34)

25.4%(n=30)

25.9%(n=140)

Looking to main cast trends, 10% of main cast actors in 2021 were Asian. This was not significantly different
from 2018. Films (10.9%) and series (8.5%) were not significantly different from each other, and neither
increased significantly from 2018. See Table 41. Across both film and series, Netflix content has reachedproportional representation with the U.S. population (6.1%)57 for Asian main cast actors.
Table 41
Asian Main Cast by Storytelling Medium and Year
Format

2018

2019

2020

2021

Film

7.2%
(n=40)

8.2%(n=39)

10.8%(n=59)

10.9%(n=68)

Series5.9%(n=40)

7.1%(n=56)

8.9%(n=44)

8.5%(n=35)

Total

6.5%(n=80)

7.5%(n=95)

9.9%(n=103)10%(n=103)We also explored the ethnic identity or background of main cast actors across the 4-year sample. The goal
was to understand whether Netflix stories encompass an array of Asian communities. Overall, the largest
share of main cast actors were Indian, followed by Chinese, Korean, Filipino, and Japanese actors. See Table
42.

Page 42

Table 42
Asian Main Cast Actors by Storytelling Medium
Community

Film

Series

Total

Chinese17%(n=35)

16.7%(n=29)

16.8%(n=64)

Filipino

11.7%(n=24)

12.1%(n=21)

11.8%(n=45)

Indian29.1%(n=60)

27.6%(n=48)

28.4%(n=108)Indonesian

4.4%
(n=9)

<1%
(n=1)

2.6%
(n=10)

Japanese

13.6%(n=28)

7.5%(n=13)

10.8%(n=41)

Korean9.7%(n=20)

17.8%(n=31)

13.4%(n=51)

Laotian

0

<1%
(n=1)

<1%
(n=1)

Nepali

0

<1%
(n=1)

<1%
(n=1)

Pakistani

1.9%
(n=4)

3.4%
(n=6)

2.6%
(n=10)

Singaporean

<1%
(n=1)

1.1%
(n=2)

<1%
(n=3)

Sri Lankan

<1%
(n=1)

1.1%
(n=2)

<1%
(n=3)

Taiwanese

1.9%
(n=4)

0

1.1%
(n=4)

Thai

1%
(n=2)

<1%
(n=1)

<1%
(n=3)

Vietnamese

2.4%
(n=5)

2.9%
(n=5)

2.6%
(n=10)

Multicultural

6.3%(n=13)

7.5%(n=13)

6.8%(n=26)

Page 43

Behind the camera, 6% of directors in 2021 were Asian, as were 5.7% of writers, and 4.2% of producers.
The percentage of Asian individuals across each of these positions has not meaningfully increased over time.
See Table 43.
Table 43
Percentage of Asian Above-the-Line Film Personnel by Year
Measures

2018

2019

2020

2021

Directors

4.2%
(n=3)

1.7%
(n=1)

3.3%
(n=2)

6%
(n=4)

Writers

4%
(n=4)

5%
(n=5)

3%
(n=3)

5.7%
(n=6)

Producers

5.6%(n=14)

2.2%
(n=4)

3.5%
(n=7)

4.2%
(n=10)

Turning to series, 6% of creators were Asian in 2021, as were, 5.4% of producers, 8.2% of writers and 6.1%
of directors. The creators were: Aziz Ansari, Alan Yang, Robia Rashid, Mindy Kaling, and Tony Ayres. These
creators were responsible for 4 different series. There was no change over time in the percentage of Asiancreators, producers, writers, and directors of Netflix series.
Table 44
Percentage of Asian Above-the-Line Series Personnel by Year
Measures

2018

2019

2020

2021

Creators

1.7%
(n=2)

1.4%
(n=2)

1%
(n=1)

6%
(n=5)

Producers

2.9%(n=21)

3.9%(n=34)

3.3%(n=22)

5.4%(n=28)

Writers

4.1%(n=49)

4.6%(n=66)

4.8%(n=38)

8.2%(n=80)

Directors

6%(n=46)

3.8%(n=34)

5.8%(n=31)

6.1%(n=31)

Latinx Cast & Crew. In this section, we report on Latinx cast and crew. For this measure, we began byassessing the presence of Hispanic/Latinos from all racial/ethnic backgrounds. Then, to identify Latinx cast

Page 44and crew, we focused more narrowly on those who were born in the U.S. or its territories, excluding thosewith Spanish origin and no other Latino identification.
Films had a Latinx lead/co lead when at least one protagonist was Latinx, while series had a Latinx lead/colead when a minimum of 12% of series regulars were Latinx, which is in line with population metrics for thiscommunity. 58 As shown in Table 45, 18.6% of Netflix films and series in 2021 had Latinx leads/co leads. Thisis significantly more than in 2018 (6.8%), though less than the high reached in 2020 (20.8%).
For Netflix films, there was linear increase from 2018 (1.4%) to 2021 (10.8%) in the percentage of movies
with a Latinx lead/co lead. For series, an overall gain occurred from 2018 to 2021. Latinx leads/co leads wereat their highest point in Netflix series content in 2020 (32.3%).
Table 45
Latinx Leads/Co Leads by Storytelling Medium and Year
Format

2018

2019

2020

2021

Total

Film

1.4%
(n=1)

7%
(n=4)

8.6%
(n=5)

10.8%
(n=7)

6.8%
(n=17)

Series

11.4%
(n=9)

20.6%
(n=20)

32.3%(n=20)

28.3%(n=15)

22%(n=64)

Total

6.8%(n=10)

15.6%(n=24)

20.8%(n=25)

18.6%(n=22)

15%(n=81)

Looking to main cast actors, 6.4% of those in this role were Latinx across 2021 Netflix films and series. This
figure has not meaningfully improved since 2018. Given that the percentage of Latinx people in the U.S. isroughly 12%,59 this figure falls below proportional representation. There was no difference between film andseries in the percentage of Latinx main cast. Additionally, neither has changed significantly from 2018 to
2021. Only in series was there any notable increase, from 2018 to 2020. See Table 46.

Page 45

Table 46
Latinx Main Cast by Storytelling Medium and Year
Format

2018

2019

2020

2021

Film

3.2%
(n=18)

4%(n=19)

7.1%(n=39)

5.8%(n=36)

Series3.4%(n=23)

6.5%(n=51)

8.9%(n=44)

7.3%(n=30)

Total

3.3%(n=41)

5.6%(n=70)

8%(n=83)

6.4%(n=66)

Behind the camera in film, 4.5% of directors in 2021 were Latinx, as were 1.9% of writers and 2.5% ofproducers. There has been no significant improvement for Latinx directors or producers in film since 2018.
For writers, 2020 was a high point, as 6% of writers were Latinx that year, but this was not sustained into
2021.
Table 47
Percentage of Latinx Above-the-Line Film Personnel by Year
Measures

2018

2019

2020

2021

Directors

1.4%
(n=1)

0

3.3%
(n=2)

4.5%
(n=3)

Writers

0

1%
(n=1)

6%
(n=6)

1.9%
(n=2)

Producers

1.2%
(n=3)

1.1%
(n=2)

2.5%
(n=5)

2.5%
(n=6)

Across Netflix series, 3.6% of creators were Latinx in 2021. Similarly, 3% of producers, 3.7% of writers, and2.7% of directors were Latinx in 2021. The 3 creators were responsible for 2 series and were: Eddie Gonzalez,
Linda Yvette Chávez, Marvin Lemus. There was no change over time across any of these above-the-line
positions.

Page 46

Table 48
Percentage of Latinx Above-the-Line Series Personnel by Year
Measures

2018

2019

2020

2021

Creators

2.5%
(n=3)

2.7%
(n=4)

6.8%
(n=7)

3.6%
(n=3)

Producers

2.6%(n=19)

2.6%(n=23)

2.7%(n=18)

3%(n=16)

Writers2.5%(n=31)

2.4%(n=35)

4.7%(n=37)

3.7%(n=36)

Directors

2.6%(n=20)

2.4%(n=22)

4.3%(n=23)

2.7%(n=14)

Middle Eastern/North African Cast & Crew. A Middle Eastern/North African (MENA) lead/co lead included
films with a MENA protagonist and series in which at least 1% of series regulars were MENA. Few Netflix films
or series had MENA leads/co leads in 2021, with no observed change over time.
While no film leads/co leads were MENA in 2021, 7.5% of series had a lead/co lead MENA actor.60 However,neither format increased significantly over time. Turning to main cast, 2.1% of main cast actors in 2021 were
MENA, with no change since 2018. The percentage of MENA main cast did not differ across films (2.6%) or
series (1.5%) in 2021, and neither varied over the four years evaluated.
Table 49
MENA Leads/Co Leads & Main Cast by Storytelling Medium and Year
Leads/Co Leads

Main Cast

Format
2018

2019

2020

2021

2018

2019

2020

2021

Film

3%
(n=2)

0

3.5%
(n=2)

0

<1%
(n=2)

0

1.6%
(n=9)

2.6%
(n=16)

Series

3.8%
(n=3)

5.2%
(n=5)

3.2%
(n=2)

7.5%
(n=4)

<1%
(n=3)

1%
(n=8)

1%
(n=5)

1.5%
(n=6)

Total

3.4%
(n=5)

3.3%
(n=5)

3.4%
(n=4)

3.4%
(n=4)

<1%
(n=5)

<1%
(n=8)

1.3%
(n=14)

2.1%(n=22)

Page 47

Behind the camera, few MENA creatives worked above the line in 2021 Netflix films. This included 1.5% of
directors, 1.9% of writers, and less than 1% of producers. In Netflix series from 2021, 2.4% of series
creators, 1.5% of producers, <1% of writers, and 1.6% of directors were MENA. There has been no increaseover time for MENA creatives in Netflix films or series.

American Indian/Alaskan Native Cast & Crew. Only 6% of programs had a lead/co lead that was American
Indian/Alaskan Native (AIAN) in 2021.61 By definition, films with an AIAN lead/co lead had at least one AIAN
protagonist and series had a minimum of 1% of series regulars who identified with this racial/ethnic group.
Overall, 2021 was not significantly different than 2018, and neither film nor series evidenced an increase overtime. Looking to main cast actors, 1.6% were AIAN, on par with the U.S. population.62 As with leads/co
leads, there was no difference by program format and no change over time. See Table 50
Table 50
AIAN Leads/Co Leads & Main Cast by Storytelling Medium and Year
Leads/Co Leads

Main Cast

Format
2018

2019

2020

2021

2018

2019

2020

2021

Film

1.5%
(n=1)

1.9%
(n=1)

0

6.3%
(n=4)

<1%
(n=1)

<1%
(n=1)

<1%
(n=1)

2.3%
(n=14)

Series

5.1%
(n=4)

7.2%
(n=7)

6.5%
(n=4)

5.7%
(n=3)

<1%
(n=4)

1.3%
(n=10)

1%
(n=5)

<1%
(n=3)

Total

3.4%
(n=5)

5.3%
(n=8)

3.4%
(n=4)

6%
(n=7)

<1%
(n=5)

<1%
(n=11)

<1%
(n=6)

1.6%
(n=17)

Behind the camera, there were no AIAN film directors or writers in 2020 or 2021, and 3 producers (2020=1;
2021=2). In series, no AIAN creators were responsible for Netflix series, though 1 producer, 2 writers, and 5
directors were affiliated with Netflix content in 2020 and 2021.

Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander Cast & Crew. Of Netflix films and series in 2021, 2.6% had a Native
Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (NHPI) lead/co lead. This was defined as films with a NHPI protagonist and series
in which 1% or more of series regulars were NHPI.63 Overall, the percentage of NHPI leads/co leads did notchange over time or in film. However, the percentage of series with a NHPI lead/co lead declined from 2018
to 2021. Only 1% of main cast actors were NHPI, which did not vary by year or by format.

Page 48

Table 51
NHPI Leads/Co Leads & Main Cast by Storytelling Medium and Year
Leads/Co Leads

Main Cast

Format
2018

2019

2020

2021

2018

2019

2020

2021

Film

0

3.8%
(n=2)

1.8%
(n=1)

4.8%
(n=3)

0

<1%
(n=2)

<1%
(n=3)

1.6%
(n=10)

Series

6.3%
(n=5)

3.1%
(n=3)

3.2%
(n=2)

0

1.2%
(n=8)

<1%
(n=4)

<1%
(n=3)

0

Total

3.4%
(n=5)

3.3%
(n=5)

2.5%
(n=3)

2.6%
(n=3)

<1%
(n=8)

<1%
(n=6)

<1%
(n=6)

1%
(n=10)

Behind the camera in film, only 2 producers in 2021 were NHPI, with no directors or writers affiliated withthis community. In series, all NHPI creatives appeared in 2020, including 2 directors, 2 writers, and 1
producer.
The results in this section reveal that while Netflix has demonstrated gains for underrepresented charactersin its content, this was primarily true for Black and Asian cast and Latinx leads/co leads. Behind the camera,
the largest improvements were seen among Black creatives. Moving forward, the investment and intention
that Netflix has made to increase the prevalence of Black and Asian cast and crew can be extended to otherracial/ethnic groups.
LGBTQ+In this section, we examine the prevalence of LGBTQ+-identified characters as leads/co leads, within main
cast/series regulars, and overall speaking characters. Focusing on leads/co leads, we were interested in thepercentage of shows that depicted an LGBTQ+ character driving the plot. For film, a movie was coded as
LGBTQ+ lead/co lead if either protagonist was part of this community. For series, however, we stipulated
that only 10% of the series regulars had to be coded as LGBTQ for a show to qualify. The 10% criterion wasused to reflect population norms of LGBTQ+ individuals living in the U.S.64

Page 49

Table 52
Percentage of LGBTQ Leads/Co Leads by Year and Storytelling format
2018
Measure

2019

2020

2021

Film

SeriesFilm

SeriesFilm

SeriesFilm

Series% of LGBTQ
leads/co leads

2.9%
(n=2)

19%
(n=15)

5.3%
(n=3)

28.9%
(n=28)

5.2%
(n=3)

43.5%
(n=27)

7.7%
(n=5)

35.8%
(n=19)

Total

11.5% (n=17)

20.1% (n=31)

25% (n=30)

20.3% (n=24)

In 2021, 20.3% (n=24) of Netflix films and series were led/co led by LGBTQ+ characters. As shown in Table
52, this is less than the percentage in 2020 (25%) but greater than 2018 (11.5%). Format was related to thesepatterns, however.
For film, no changes were observed in LGBTQ+ leads/co leads across the 4-year sample. The 5 movies in
2021 accounted for 6 LGBTQ+ characters, with most identifying as female (83%, n=5) and lesbian (67%,n=4). Only 1 of these leads/co leads was gay and 1 was bisexual. Half of the characters were white (n=3) andhalf were multiracial (n=3). Fifty percent of LGBTQ+ leads/co leads were teens (n=3), 33% were young adults
and 17% were middle aged. Only 1 of the six LGBTQ leads/co leads was a parent.
Pivoting to series content, a different pattern emerged. Over a third (35.8%) of all programs featured LGBTQ+
characters as 10% or more of series regulars, which was less than 2020 (43.5%) but substantially higher
than 2019 (28.9%) and 2018 (19%). The 19 shows accounted for 25 unique LGBTQ+ characters. Forty-eightpercent of the characters were male and 48% were female. One character (4%) was coded as gendernonbinary. Sixty percent were White, 16% were Black and 16% were Hispanic/Latino. Only 1 LGBTQ+ lead/colead was Asian and one was multiracial. In terms of age, 64% were adults, 16% were teens, and 12% weremiddle aged. Few (16%, n=4) of the LGBTQ+ series regulars who were leads/co leads were parents.
All main cast and series regulars were coded for LGBTQ+. This set of analyses differs from the one before
as the focus was on all main cast/series regulars rather than just those appearing in shows where leads/co
leads represent 10% or more of the cast. Of all the main cast/series regulars, 5.7% in 2021 were LGBTQ+(see Table 53). No meaningful differences emerged from 2018 to 2021. The highest percentage of LGBTQ+
main cast/series regulars was observed in 2020 in episodic content, but there were no other over timedifferences by format. As a point of comparison, 9.1% of primetime broadcast series regulars in the 2020/21
season were LGBTQ+, according to GLAAD.65
Given that there were no differences overall in main cast/series regulars across film and series, we present
the demographic profile of LGBTQ+ characters together. In 2021, the majority of main cast/series regulars
was female (54.4%, male=43.9%, nonbinary=1.8%). Just over half (50.9%) of all LGBTQ+ main cast/series
regulars were White, with 15.8% Black, 12.3% Hispanic/Latino, 8.8% Asian, 10.5% Multiracial/Multiethnic,
and 1.8% Middle Eastern/North African. The majority (50.9%) of LGBTQ+ characters in 2021 were adult inage followed by teens (29.8%) and then middle agers (15.8%). Only 3.5% or 2 LGBTQ+ series regulars/maincast were elderly. Six or 10.6% of the LGBTQ+ series regulars/main cast were caregivers or parents.

Page 50

Table 53
Percentage of LGBTQ Main Cast by Year and Storytelling Format
2018
Measure% of LGBTQ
main cast

2019

2021

Film

SeriesFilm

SeriesFilm

SeriesFilm

Series3.8%(n=21)

4.6%(n=30)

4.9%(n=23)

7.4%(n=55)

5.3%(n=29)

10.3%(n=49)

5%(n=31)

6.7%(n=26)

4.2% (n=51)

Total

2020

6.4% (n=78)

7.6% (n=78)

5.7% (n=57)

Out of all speaking or named characters in 2021 Netflix content, 3.2% (n=127) were LGBTQ+ with nodifferences observed between film (2.4%) and series (4%) (See Table 54). 2021 did not deviate meaningfully
from 2020 or 2018. The majority of LGBTQ+ speaking characters in 2021 were gay (52.8%, n=67), 35.4%(n=45) were lesbian, 8.7% (n=11) were bisexual, and 3.2% (n=4) transgender.
Table 54
Percentage of LGBTQ Speaking Characters by Year and Storytelling Format
2018
Measures

2019

2020

2021

Film

SeriesFilm

SeriesFilm

SeriesFilm

Series% of LGBTQ
speaking
characters

1.9%(n=47)

2.5%(n=83)

2.1%(n=46)

4.1%(n=162)2.1%(n=46)

4.8%(n=120)2.4%(n=48)

4%(n=79)

Total

2.2% (n=130)

3.4% (n=208)

3.5% (n=166)

3.2% (n=127)

Most LGBTQ+ speaking or named characters were male (56.7%). Over forty percent were female (42.5%)and <1% were gender nonbinary. In terms of race/ethnicity, 46.5% of LGBTQ+ speaking characters wereWhite, 22.8% were Black, 11.8% were Multiracial/Multiethnic, 9.4% were Hispanic/Latino, 7.1% were Asian,and 2.4% were MENA. The vast majority of LGBTQ+ speaking characters were portrayed as adults (59.8%)
or teens (21.3%). Fewer middle aged (17.3%) or elderly (1.6%) LGBTQ+ speaking characters were shown
across Netflix content in 2021. Eleven (8.7%) of the 127 LGBTQ+ speaking characters were depicted asparents or caregivers.
Finally, we were interested in the prevalence of shows that failed to depict any LGBTQ+ characters acrossthe plot. The results are shown in Table 55. Fifty-five percent of all fictional stories in 2021 (55.1%) were
missing the LGBTQ+ community on screen, which is no different from 2020 (58.2%) but significantly lower
than 2018 (61.1%). Differences emerged by medium, however. Series decreased significantly in the number

Page 51

and percentage of shows that erased the LGBTQ+ community on screen from 2018 (56.2%) to 2021 (41.5%).
For film, 2021 (66.2%) was lower than 2020 (74.1%) but not different from 2018 (66.7%).
Table 55
Number of Stories Missing LGBTQ+ Representation
Year

2018

2019

2020

2021

Total

Film

66.7%
(n=46)

70.2%(n=40)

74.1%(n=43)

66.2%(n=43)

69.1%(n=172)

Series56.2%(n=45)

53%(n=53)

43.8%(n=28)

41.5%(n=22)

49.8%(n=148)

Total

61.1%
(n=91)

59.2%(n=93)

58.2%(n=71)

55.1%(n=65)

58.6%(n=320)Sample Size

149

157

122

118

546

Netflix content has shown some gains when it comes to LGBTQ+ representation over the past four years. Thisis evident in the fluctuation of leads/co leads and series regulars/main cast, while the percentage of series
without an LGBTQ+ character has declined. However, more than half of films and series did not feature an
LGBTQ+ speaking character. Incorporating more characters across series is a key way to increase LGBTQ+
representation overall. After exploring on-screen representation for the LGBTQ+ community, we were also
curious about how another marginalized community is represented in Netflix content. In the next section,
we turn our attention to characters with disabilities in Netflix content.
CHARACTERS WITH DISABILITIESThis section examines how characters with disabilities were represented in Netflix films and series. The
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)’s definition was referenced in our conceptualization of characters withdisabilities.66 Once a character fit the definition, the nature of the disability was then categorized into U.S.
Census designations as communicative, cognitive, and/or physical.67 Below, we describe the prevalence ofdisabilities among leads/co leads, main cast/series regular characters, and all speaking or named
characters.
In 2021, 4.2% (n=5) of programs featured a lead/co lead with a disability. Lead/co lead designations weremade when the protagonist(s) in a film or when 27% or more of series regulars within an episodic show had
a disability. The percentage of leads/co leads in 2021 was nearly equivalent to that in 2018 (4.1%). See Table
56. Films (7.7%) in 2021 were also similar to 2018 (8.7%), though the high-water mark for movies showcasing
a lead/co lead with a disability occurred in 2019 (15.8%). No series in 2021 had a lead/co lead with adisability, the same as in 2018. Netflix was on pace with top-grossing films (5%) in 2021 in terms of leads/co
leads with a disability.68

Page 52

Table 56
Percentage of Leads/Co-Leads with a Disability By Storytelling Format and Year
Format

2018

2019

2020

2021

Film

8.7%
(n=6)

15.8%
(n=9)

6.9%
(n=4)

7.7%
(n=5)

Series

0

2.1%
(n=2)

3.2%
(n=2)

0

Total

4.1%
(n=6)

7.1%
(n=11)

5%
(n=6)

4.2%
(n=5)

Of the 5 lead/co lead characters with a disability in Netflix’s 2021 films, 1 was male and 4 were female. In
terms of race/ethnicity, 4 leading characters with a disability were white while 1 was Hispanic/Latino. Threelead characters were middle aged, 1 was a young adult, and 1 was a teen. Only one leading character with adisability was identified as LGBTQ+ and 2 were parents.
Turning to series regulars/main cast, 1.8% (n=18) of these characters in 2021 programming were depictedwith a disability. This is not meaningfully different from the percentage in 2018 (4.4%). There were similar
percentages of main cast characters with disabilities across films (1.6%,) and series (2%), and neither varied
over time. Looking to the broader entertainment industry, GLAAD reports that 3.5% of series regularcharacters in primetime broadcast were shown with a disability in the 2020-21 season.69
Table 57
Main Cast Characters with Disabilities in Netflix Films and Series
Measures

2018

2019

2020

2021

Film

3.4%
(n=19)

4.9%(n=23)

4.9%(n=27)

1.6%(n=10)

Series5.2%(n=34)

5%(n=37)

4%(n=19)

2%
(n=8)

Total

4.4%
(n=53)

4.9%(n=60)

4.5%(n=46)

1.8%(n=18)Of the 18 main cast characters with a disability, half (n=9) were female and 44.4% (n=8) were male, while
one was gender non-binary. Nearly two-thirds (61.1%, n=11) of the 18 main cast characters with a disability
were White, while 38.9% (n=7) were underrepresented. Few main cast characters with a disability were
LGBTQ+ (11.1%, n=2). Most of the main cast characters with a disability were middle aged (44.4%, n=8) orPage 53

young adults (21-39 years of age; 33.3%, n=6), while 16.7% (n=3) were teens (13-20 years of age) and 5.6%(n=1) were elderly (65+ years of age). Of the main cast characters who could be evaluated for parental status,
41.7% (n=5) were parents while 58.3% (n=7) were not parents.
The prevalence of speaking characters with disabilities was evaluated. In 2021, 1.1% (n=43) of all speaking
characters were shown with a disability. This was on par with 2018 (1.9%). Films (1%) and series (1.2%)
featured a similar percentage of characters with disabilities in 2021, with neither evidencing any change overtime. As a point of comparison, top-grossing films from 2021 featured of 1.4% speaking characters with adisability.70
Table 58
Speaking Characters with Disabilities in Netflix Films and Series
Measures

2018

2019

2020

2021

Film

1.3%
(n=33)

1.7%(n=37)

2.1%(n=48)

1%(n=20)

Series2.4%(n=83)

2.5%(n=100)1.9%(n=48)

1.2%(n=23)

Total

1.9%(n=116)2.2%(n=137)2%(n=96)

1.1%(n=43)Of the characters with disabilities in 2021 across both films and series, 53.5% were male, 44.2% were female,and 2.3% (n=1) were gender nonbinary. Nearly three-quarters of the characters with disabilities were White(74.4%) and 25.6% were from underrepresented racial/ethnic groups. Few were LGBTQ+ (14%). In terms ofage, 34.9% of characters with a disability were middle aged, 25.6% were teens, 20.9% were young adults(age 21-39), while 16.3% were elderly, and 2.3% were children. Only 7 characters with a disability wereparents.
We further explored the percentage of films and series that rendered characters with disabilities invisible,
or failed to depict even one speaking or named character with a disability. This was the case for nearly threequarters (72%) of films and series in 2021, which was an increase from 2018 (55.7%) and from 2020 (50%).
By format, 75.4% of Netflix movies were without a character with a disability, significantly more than 2018(66.7%) or 2020 (51.7%). In series, two-thirds (67.9%) of series did not have a speaking role for a characterwith a disability, a jump from 2018 (46.2%) and 2020 (50%).

Page 54

Table 59
Number of Stories Missing Representation of Characters with Disabilities
Year

2018

2019

2020

2021

Total

Film

66.7%
(n=46)

57.9%(n=33)

51.7%(n=30)

75.4%(n=49)

63.5%(n=158)

Series46.2%(n=37)

59%(n=59)

48.4%(n=31)

67.9%(n=36)

54.9%(n=163)

Total

55.7%
(n=83)

58.6%(n=92)

50%(n=61)

72%(n=85)

58.8%(n=321)

Sample Size

149

157

122

118

546

In addition to overall prevalence, we were also curious about the nature of disabilities presented on screen.
Once a character was identified as having a disability, they were evaluated for whether the disability
occurred in the physical, cognitive, or communicative domain. Characters could experience more than one
disability, and thus could be categorized in more than one domain.
Table 60
Domain of Disability in 2021 Netflix Films and Series
MeasuresPhysicalCognitive

Communicative

Film

65%
(n=13)

20%
(n=4)

25%
(n=5)

Series56.5%(n=13)

26.1%
(n=6)

26.1%
(n=6)

Total

60.5%
(n=26)

23.2%(n=10)

25.6%(n=11)As shown in Table 60, characters in 2021 Netflix programming were most likely to experience physicaldisabilities (60.5%). The percentage of characters with physical disabilities was higher in film (65%) than inseries (56.5%). Examples of characters with physical disabilities included those who had mobility issues,
were missing limbs, or were depicted in a wheelchair. Communicative disabilities were experienced by aquarter of all characters with disabilities (25.6%), and occurred almost equally in film (25%) and series(26.1%). Examples of communicative disabilities include blind characters, deaf characters, and thoseexperiencing speech issues. Finally, 23.2% of characters with disabilities had cognitive disabilities. Series

Page 55

(26.1%) were more likely to depict cognitive disabilities than film (20%). Examples of cognitive disabilities
include depression, anxiety, Down Syndrome, PTSD, and dyslexia.
In summary, characters with disabilities as leads/co leads, main cast/series regulars, and all speaking
characters remained below proportional representation with the U.S. population. Moreover, thesepercentages have not changed across the four years examined. The profile of characters with disabilities
was also limited; the majority of characters with disabilities had a physical disability, and most were still
White and male. Looking ahead, this community represents an opportunity for greater inclusion in the
future.
CONCLUSION

The purpose of this analysis was to provide an update to our findings on Netflix scripted U.S. films and series
from 2018 and 2019. We evaluated 123 films and 117 series across two additional years (2020, 2021) andpaired those with our investigation of 126 films and 180 series from 2018 and 2019. In total, 546 films andseries were examined over a four-year period. Results from 2021 were compared to findings from our initial
analysis. Below, major findings across the study are provided.

Gender is Not a Problem in Major Roles across Netflix Content
For decades, the entertainment industry has struggled to represent girls/women equally on screen. At
Netflix, however, female characters filled more than half of all lead/co lead roles, and close to 50% of main
cast/series regular character positions in 2021. Behind the scenes, Netflix outpaced the wider industry in its
hiring practices across directors, writers, and producers in film and for series creators and writers. While
advocacy and activism has moved the needle incrementally in top-grossing movies, decision-making at
Netflix appears to privilege a quicker pace to ensuring that girls and women share the screen and have aplace behind the camera.
Given these values, there are two places to that merit ongoing improvement. The first is the arena of female
speaking characters. Netflix is on an upward trajectory in this area, but still falls below the population metricof 50%. Targeting smaller roles on screen for the inclusion of female characters will also address the second
area: stories that are gender-balanced. By working to place female characters across the spectrum of its
storytelling, Netflix content will even more closely resemble the world in which we live.

Netflix Achieves Proportional Representation for Underrepresented Racial/Ethnic Groups
Across leads/co leads, main cast, and all speaking characters, Netflix films and series in 2020 and 2021 haveincluded individuals from underrepresented racial/ethnic groups at or above proportional representation to
the U.S. population. The gains noted across these measures since 2018 reflect an ongoing commitment totelling stories that spotlight underrepresented groups.
With the results regarding gender and race/ethnicity, it is not a surprise that Netflix content also focuses on
girls/women of color in near proportion to the population. In fact, films and series in 2020 and 2021 featured
underrepresented female protagonists beyond proportional representation—more than half of series in
2021 featured women of color in leading/co leading roles. Behind the camera, Netflix employed more womenof color as series creators, writers, and directors in 2021 than in 2018. These findings are notable given thewidespread and historical lack of representation for women of color in entertainment.

Page 56

Netflix Content Needs Improvement in Specific Areas Related to Racial/Ethnic Representation
Despite the gains for women and people of color overall, there are areas for improvement when it comes tounderrepresented girls/women. Invisibility is the norm for women from some racial/ethnic groups. Ensuringthat storytelling is inclusive of Indigenous girls/women, as well as those from other marginalized
communities is imperative.
Additionally, behind the camera, there are still gaps for underrepresented creatives and particularly womenof color in key roles. Overall increases for underrepresented content creators across the entertainment
industry mean that Netflix’s choices are in line with its peers. In film, however, increasing the number ofwomen of color working across decision-making positions behind the scenes are an important way for Netflix
to take a leadership role in entertainment.
Beyond these areas, improving representation for the Latinx community is one place to focus. Overall
Hispanic/Latino representation in Netflix content lags when compared to population norms, and for theLatinx (U.S.-born Latino) community, the disparity widens, particularly behind the camera. Additionally,
representation and employment of people from Indigenous and Middle Eastern/North African communities
are areas where Netflix can target its efforts.

Netflix Content Showcases LGBTQ+ Leads but Lacks More Minor Roles
Between 2018 and 2021, the percentage of Netflix series with LGBTQ+ leads increased significantly, whilefilm leads trended upward but did not improve meaningfully. The increase in LGBTQ+ protagonists suggeststhat Netflix has worked to identify ways to tell more stories centered on the LGBTQ+ community. In film, thisincludes an intersectional lens as most of the LGBTQ+ leads were women, and half were from anunderrepresented racial/ethnic group.
Yet, when it comes to main cast roles and all speaking characters, Netflix has not yet reached proportional
representation for LGBTQ+ individuals. Portrayals still tend to focus on gay characters rather than the entire
spectrum of LGBTQ+ identity. However, there are bright spots, including the percentage ofunderrepresented LGBTQ+ main cast and speaking characters. For the LGBTQ+ community, then, Netflix cancontinue its existing work to spotlight LGBTQ+ storytelling while diversifying the perspective from whichthese stories are told.

Characters with Disabilities Are Consistently Underrepresented in Netflix Content
Industry-wide, characters with disabilities remain marginalized in entertainment content. The trends
described in this report reveal that Netflix has not deviated from its peers and competitors in the prevalenceof leads, main cast, or speaking characters with disabilities. Overall, there has been little change over time
for this community, and Netflix content remains far below proportional representation.
In addition to the lack of characters with disabilities, when these characters do appear on screen, they often
fit a narrow profile. Across all speaking characters, those with disabilities were primarily white and male,often with physical disabilities. There is room for Netflix to represent the broader array of experiences within
the community. Ensuring that storytelling encompasses a multitude of identity groups is one way that Netflix
can immediately bolster its numbers.

Limitations

Page 57

A few limitations must be noted, as with any research investigation. First, only U.S. original scripted films
and series were evaluated for this report. Looking to other types of Netflix content (e.g., unscripted,
animation) could provide additional insight into where the company is showcasing inclusive content beyond
one format. Second, across the report we have endeavored to provide industry benchmarking. Differencesin methodological approach, a lack of data, and the process of creating single comparison statistics warrant
caution in interpretation of some of these metrics. These figures are provided as an estimation for interested
readers. Lastly, some methods and data analytic practices have been updated since our previous study, andfigures in this report may vary from those initially reported. Endnotes provide insight into which analyses
may differ and why.

Final Note
Across four years of evaluation, Netflix has demonstrated that its content continues to move toward greater
inclusivity for women, people of color, and the LGBTQ+ community. Given the findings in this report, it isclear that the company has been reflective and intentional regarding how its content can serve its audienceand how its practices can ensure access and opportunity. At a time of industry flux and transformation,
ensuring that these practices continue to be in place will be important to establishing Netflix as a champion
for inclusion.

Page 58

Endnotes
1. The methodology for this report mirrors that usedby the Annenberg Inclusion Initiative in its study ofNetflix fictional films and series from 2018 and 2019.
As in the previous study, the samples (2020, 2021)
were determined by Netflix calendar-year releases ofscripted, fictional, live-action content considered an
original to the company. This included films andscripted series, along with TV specials, which were
included in the series sample. Information on theevaluation process, including unitizing and variable
reliability can be obtained from the Annenberg
Inclusion Initiative.
2. Only films driven by a lead/co lead were able to beevaluated for the presence of a female in either ofthese roles. Put differently, ensemble movies (withthree or more leading characters) were automaticallycoded as “0” or not featuring a female lead or colead. This approach was taken so that we cancompare Netflix findings to leads/co leads indomestic top-grossing box office movies. Across the
4-year sample, only 9 films were defined as
ensembles (2=2018, 4=2019, 1=2020, 2=2021). Of
these, 5 featured girls and women in 50% or more of
the ensemble cast. If we were to recalculate thepercentage of films with a female lead/co leads withthese movies included, the percentages by year wereas follows: 2018 (46.4%, n=32), 2019 (56.1%, n=32),
2020 (58.6%, n=34), 2021 (67.7%, n=44).
3. Series regulars were determined using IMDbPro andLuminate (formerly Variety Insight). Series regulars
reflect recurring characters who appear throughout
content. When information was not available via
online database, the Netflix platform was used to
identify main cast/series regulars.
4. U.S. Census Bureau (2020). Quick Facts. Retrieved
December 03, 2021 fromhttps://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/SE
X255219#SEX255219.
5. Neff, K., Smith, S.L., & Pieper, K. (2022, March).
Inequality across 1,500 popular films: Examining
gender and race/ethnicity of leads/co leads from2007 to 2021. Annenberg Inclusion Initiative, Los
Angeles, CA.
6. For comparison purposes, we relied on the leads asdetermined by the UCLA Hollywood Diversity Report.
See https://socialsciences.ucla.edu/wp-

content/uploads/2022/10/UCLA-Hollywood-DiversityReport-2022-Television-10-27-2022.pdf. There are
two limitations to using the UCLA findings forcomparison purposes. In that report, leads are “thefirst credited actor/performer for a given project’s listof cast members” (p. 66). Put differently, the authorsof that report did not actually view the storylines andrender a judgment about inclusion. Given thatcharacter order listing on sites like IMDbPro, Variety
Insight, and/or even credits can be influenced bynotoriety, contractual agreements, and/or marketing,this approach to measurement is only a crude
indicator of who carries a story line. Further, the UCLA
study does not report the percentage across all
television evaluated. As such, we took the average ofthree percentages from broadcast (44.3%), cable(49.1%), and digital (40.9%) series.
7. Of the total main cast members evaluated in both
Netflix films and series, we found that less than 1%(n=6 or 4,567) were gender non-binary. Those 6
characters include (2018=2, 2019=1, 2021=3). All but
one of these characters were featured in scripted
content. Due to the small sample size, thesecharacters were removed prior to analysis.
8. Lauzen, M.M., (2020). It’s a Man’s (Celluloid)
World: Portrayals of Female Characters in Top
Grossing U.S. Films of 2020. San Diego State
University, CA. https://womenintvfilm.sdsu.edu/wpcontent/uploads/2021/04/2020_Its_a_Mans_World_
Report_v2.pdf.
9. Lauzen, M. (2021). Boxed In: Women On Screen and
Behind the Scenes on Broadcast and Streaming
Television in 2020/21. Retrieved from:https://womenintvfilm.sdsu.edu/wpcontent/uploads/2021/09/202021_Boxed_In_Report.pdf. Lauzen, M. (2020). Boxed In
2019-20: Women On Screen and Behind the Scenes in
Television. Retrieved fromhttps://womenintvfilm.sdsu.edu/wpcontent/uploads/2020/09/20192020_Boxed_In_Report.pdf.
10. The number of female characters within eachindividual program was calculated to determine
whether a film or series was gender balanced. A
program was considered to have gender balance if
the percentage of female-identifying characters or
main cast fell within a range of 10% above or below

Page 59

the U.S. Census Bureau (2020) statistic of females in
the population. In this case, the range was 45.72% to55.88%.
11. For film, behind-the-camera positions werecompiled based on information available on
IMDbPro.com. The gender and race/ethnicity of eachindividual was ascertained using the same procedure
outlined for main cast, as described above, with anotable exception. When possible, confirmation ofrace/ethnicity was sought from the individual’s
representation (e.g., agents, managers, etc.).
Information obtained from other Annenberg Inclusion
Initiative studies was also used to provide
race/ethnicity and gender information for behind-thecamera personnel.
12. Unpublished Annenberg Inclusion Initiative data.
13. Ramon, A.C., Tran, M., & Hunt, D. (2022).
Hollywood Diversity Report 2022: A New Post
Pandemic Normal? Retrieved from:https://socialsciences.ucla.edu/wpcontent/uploads/2022/10/UCLA-Hollywood-DiversityReport-2022-Television-10-27-2022.pdf. For
comparison purposes, the UCLA Hollywood Diversity
Report 2022 was used. We averaged the percentage
of female show creators across broadcast, cable, anddigital series.
14. Comparison data were taken from Lauzen’s Boxed
In reports. See https://womenintvfilm.sdsu.edu/wpcontent/uploads/2022/10/2021-22-Boxed-InReport.pdf and https://womenintvfilm.sdsu.edu/wpcontent/uploads/2020/09/20192020_Boxed_In_Report.pdf. For 2020/21, only theaverages of broadcast and streaming were calculated
for comparison purposes. For the three earlier years,
we averaged across broadcast, cable, and streaming.
15. Lauzen (2021).
16. Directors Guild of America reports on the inclusionof women directors yearly. Percentages retrieved
from the following online reports:
https://www.dga.org/News/PressReleases/2021/2102
23-Episodic-Television-Director-DiversityReport.aspx.
https://www.dga.org/News/PressReleases/2022/220
505-Episodic-TV-Inclusion-Report.aspx
https://www.dga.org/News/PressReleases/2019/19111
9-Episodic-Television-Director-Diversity-Report.aspx.

17. As in our prior report, only the relationshipbetween series creators and the presence of female
main cast and speaking characters was examined. The
contributions of directors and producers in series
content to on screen casting are more ambiguous andthus this relationship was not evaluated.
18. Information on character race/ethnicity is derived
from the story plot and incorporates both explicit andimplicitly-provided information.
19. This definition of leads/co leads was employed forseries as 40% is in line with the percentage ofunderrepresented individuals in the U.S. population.
This definition has been updated from our previous
report. If films with ensemble casts in which 40% ormore of the ensemble characters were
underrepresented were included in the analysis, thefindings would change slightly. In film, the new totals
for leads/co leads would be as follows: 2021=50.8%,
n=33; 2020=46.6%, n=27; 2019=45.6%, n=26;
2018=31.9%, n=22.
20. U.S. Census (2021). Quick facts. Retrieved
December 7, 2022 fromhttps://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US/PS
T045221.
21. Neff, Smith, & Pieper (2022).
22. Neff, Smith, & Pieper (2022).
23. Ramon, Tran, & Hunt (2022).
24. Ramon, Tran, & Hunt (2022).
25. U.S. Census (2021).
26. Certain characters (e.g., robots, supernatural
creatures, non-human entities) are not capable ofpossessing a race/ethnicity. Additionally, somecharacters have a race/ethnicity that is not able to beascertained. Characters who fit either of these
designations were coded as not applicable or can’ttell for this measure and excluded from analysis.
Thus, the sample size for this analysis deviates fromwhat is reported above for gender.
27. U.S. Census (2021).
28. Data are from Annenberg Inclusion Initiative
reports.

Page 60

29. Series data are found in Ramon, Tran, & Hunt
(2022). Data on characters from 2020 films can befound in: Hunt, D. & Ramon, A-C. (2021). UCLA
Hollywood Diversity Report 2021: Pandemic in
Progress Part 1: Film. UCLA Entertainment & Media
Research Initiative.
https://socialsciences.ucla.edu/wpcontent/uploads/2021/04/UCLA-HollywoodDiversity-Report-2021-Film-4-22-2021.pdf
30. Proportional representation was calculated as thepercentage of underrepresented characters per
program out of the total number of characters per
program. In our initial analysis, we used 35.9% as thelower bound for proportional representation. Due to
U.S. population changes, that number was altered inthis replication. The change affects 1 series in 2019
which no longer reaches proportional representation.
31. As noted earlier, information on behind-thecamera personnel’s racial/ethnic background was
obtained in the same method described above. This
included using data obtained for other research at theInitiative, seeking information from industry
databases and publicly available sources, andconfirming with representatives and individuals whenpossible.
32. Smith, S.L., Pieper, K., & Khan, A. (2022). Inclusionin the Director’s Chair: Analysis of Director Gender &Race/Ethnicity Across 1,500 Top Films from 2007 to
2021. Annenberg Inclusion Initiative.
https://assets.uscannenberg.org/docs/aii-inclusiondirectors-chair-2022.pdf.
33. Data are from published and unpublished studies
by the Annenberg Inclusion Initiative.
34. Data are from published and unpublished studies
by the Annenberg Inclusion Initiative.
35. Ramon, Tran, & Hunt (2022).
36. Ramon, Tran, & Hunt (2022).
37. Directors Guild of America reports on the inclusionof underrepresented directors yearly. Percentages
retrieved from the following online reports:
https://www.dga.org/News/PressReleases/2021/2102
23-Episodic-Television-Director-DiversityReport.aspx.
https://www.dga.org/News/PressReleases/2022/220
505-Episodic-TV-Inclusion-Report.aspx

https://www.dga.org/News/PressReleases/2019/19111
9-Episodic-Television-Director-Diversity-Report.aspx.
38. U.S. Census (2021).
39. Neff, Smith, & Pieper (2022).
40. U.S. Census (2021).
41. U.S. Census (2021).
42. Lauzen (2022); Lauzen (2021).
43. U.S. Census (2021).
44. Unpublished Annenberg Inclusion Initiative data.
45. Lauzen (2021).
46. Unpublished Annenberg Inclusion Initiative data.
47. Unpublished Annenberg Inclusion Initiative data.
48. Unpublished Annenberg Inclusion Initiative data.
49. Ramon, Tran, & Hunt (2022).
50. Directors Guild of America reports on the
inclusion of underrepresented directors yearly.
Percentages retrieved from the following online
reports:
https://www.dga.org/News/PressReleases/2021/2102
23-Episodic-Television-Director-DiversityReport.aspx.
https://www.dga.org/News/PressReleases/2022/220
505-Episodic-TV-Inclusion-Report.aspx
https://www.dga.org/News/PressReleases/2019/19111
9-Episodic-Television-Director-Diversity-Report.aspx.
51. This analysis focuses on main cast and lead/colead actors rather than characters. While characters
may provide some information on their racial/ethnic
background, additional detail was available foractors, including identification with specificracial/ethnic groups, particularly for Latinx identity.
Across each racial/ethnic group, the definition ofleads/co leads was updated from how it wasdetermined in our previous report.
52. U.S. Census (2021).
53. If films with ensemble casts in which 13% or moreof the ensemble characters were Black were includedin the analysis, the findings would change slightly. In

Page 61

film, the new totals for leads/co leads would be as
follows: 2021=27.7%, n=18; 2020=27.6%, n=16;
2019=28.1%, n=16; 2018=20.3%, n=14.
54. When a Black producer worked on a film: 72.9% offilms with a Black producer had a Black lead/co leadcompared to 13% of films when no Black producers
were attached. Similarly, 58.3% of main cast actors
were Black in films with one or more Black producers
compared to 15.7% in films without a Black producer.
55. U.S. Census (2021).
56. If films with ensemble casts in which 6% or moreof the ensemble characters were Asian were includedin the analysis, the findings would change slightly. In
film, the new totals for leads/co leads would be as
follows: 2021=13.8%, n=9; 2020=10.3%, n=6;
2019=8.8%, n=5; 2018=5.8%, n=4.
57. U.S. Census (2021).
58. U.S. Census (2021). If films with ensemble casts inwhich 12% or more of the ensemble characters wereLatinx were included in the analysis, the findings
would change slightly. In film, the new totals forleads/co leads would be as follows: 2021=10.8%, n=7;
2020=8.6%, n=5; 2019=8.8%, n=5; 2018=1.4%, n=1.
59. Noe-Bustamante, L. & Flores, A. (2019, September
16). Facts on Latinos in the U.S. Pew Research Center.
Retrieved December 20, 2022 from:https://www.pewresearch.org/hispanic/factsheet/latinos-in-the-u-s-fact-sheet/
60. If films with ensemble casts in which 1% or moreof the ensemble characters were MENA were includedin the analysis, the findings would not change.
61. U.S. Census (2021). If films with ensemble casts inwhich 1% or more of the ensemble characters were
American Indian/Alaskan Native were included in theanalysis, the findings would not change.
62. U.S. Census (2021).
63. U.S. Census (2021). If films with ensemble casts inwhich 1% or more of the ensemble characters were

Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander were included in theanalysis, the findings would not change.
64. Powell, L. (2021). We Are Here: LGBTQ+ Adult
Population in United States Reaches At Least 20
Million, According to Human Rights Campaign
Foundation Report. Retrieved December 20, 2022
from https://www.hrc.org/press-releases/we-arehere-lgbtq-adult-population-in-united-statesreaches-at-least-20-million-according-to-humanrights-campaign-foundation-report
65. GLAAD (2021). Where We Are on TV. Retrieved
December 20, 2022 fromhttps://www.glaad.org/sites/default/files/GLAAD%2
0%20202021%20WHERE%20WE%20ARE%20ON%20
TV.pdf.
66. Americans with Disabilities Act (1990).
https://www. ada.gov/pubs/adastatute08.htm. The
definition of disability can be found in Smith, S.L.,
Choueiti, M., & Pieper, K. (2016). Inequality in 800
Popular Films: Examining Portrayals of Gender,
Race/Ethnicity, LGBT, and Disability from 2007-2015.
Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism.
Retrieved from:https://annenberg.usc.edu/sites/default/files/2017/0
4/10/MDSCI_Inequality_in_800_Films_FINAL.pdf.
Characters with a disability had a condition (based on
the function, form, or structure of the character’s
mind and/or body), which created a limitation(including interference and/or non-functioning)
related to a ’major life activity’ or ‘major bodilyfunction’ for longer than six months.
67. U.S. Census Bureau (2018). Americans with
Disabilities: 2014. Retrieved December 20, 2022 from:https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2018/demo/p70-152.pdf
68. Unpublished Annenberg Inclusion Initiative data.
69. GLAAD (2021).
70. Unpublished Annenberg Inclusion Initiative data.

Page 62ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Producing this report was a team effort. We are grateful to the leadership at Netflix—Ted Sarandos, Bela
Bajaria, Scott Stuber, and Rachel Whetstone—for their ongoing support of this work. Thank you to Victoria
Pavlics, Stephanie Shih, Malaika English, and Emily Feingold were collaborators and champions of this work
and we are thankful to work alongside them. Thank you all the Netflix staff members and leaders who
provided information, insight, and support for this report.
Our team at the Annenberg Inclusion Initiative proved invaluable to this process. Our staff team contributed
to this work in multiple ways. Thank you to Bryan Davis, Zoily Mercado, Sarah Neff, Matthew Davis, Al-Baab
Khan, and Brooke Kong. Collecting the data for this report involved the work of hundreds of student research
assistants, and we are grateful for their efforts!

Page 63