On the basis of risk: how screen executives' risk perceptions and practices drive gender inequality in directing

This paper explores how gendered perceptions of risk drive gender inequality. It does so by applying an Intersectional Risk Theory (IRT) framework to new empirical data on gender equality initiatives in the Canadian screen industries. The paper shows (1) that gendered risk perceptions constrain women directors’ work opportunities; (2) that the construction of gendered risk perceptions (‘doing risk’) is shaped by the screen industry context and social inequalities generally; and (3) that practices of constructing risk perceptions can be disrupted and changed, which creates opportunities for a ‘re-doing’ or ‘un-doing’ of gendered perceptions of risk and offers new analytical perspectives onto the efficacy of gender equality initiatives. By interrogating how perceptions of risk inform decision-making the paper contributes new understandings of the drivers of systemic and intersectional inequality as a defining characteristic of work and labour markets in the screen industries, and in the creative industries more broadly

International perspectives on the funding of public service media content for children

Funding original children’s television has never been easy, because this is rarely a commercially attractive audience unless you target a global audience and tap into ancillary revenues from licensed merchandise. As a case of market failure, policy makers who wish to ensure the production of a diverse range of quality content for children have therefore pursued a range of interventions to ensure sustainable levels of local content in the face of strong competition from US-owned media services. The aim of this article is to evaluate different funding options for public service children’s content in a more challenging and competitive multiplatform media environment in countries with a strong tradition of public service content for children. Focusing on interventions that go beyond PSB (quotas, alternative funds), it assesses the extent to which these interventions reflect a future-oriented approach or one that is mired in the status quo and vested interests