Whovian Feminism

After my post about the lack of women directors on our favorite TV shows was published, I saw a lot of responses from people who were confused about how exactly directors are hired for episodic television. Some of these people are genuinely curious and trying to be helpful. But some of these people are just assholes pretending to be experts to dress up their bullshit sexism with the illusion of authority.

So to bring some perspective to this discussion, I’ve asked our friend Rachel Talalay, director of the Series 8 and Series 9 finales of Doctor Who, to talk about how directors are hired on our favorite TV shows.

Alyssa (Whovian Feminism): How are directors hired for TV shows?

Rachel Talalay: This answer relates only to 10 or more episode runs of US shows. The hiring practices for pilots, features, limited series and European shows are somewhat different. I also can’t even begin to address being a new director and the gender gap in first time hires. I’m just going to explain, as well as I can, based on personal observations and many discussions with producers, how the process generally works.

The specific show’s producers, led by the Showrunner/Creator (e.g.: Ryan Murphy/Matthew Weiner/Shonda Rhimes) create a list of potential directors. The choices must be approved by the studio and the network. Sometimes lead actors are consulted or have some say.  Probably 10 or more people are involved in the approvals.

Quick note on studios and networks — most non-cable shows have both a network (broadcast outlets like NBC, Fox, etc) and a studio (WB) — which are distinct entities. The studio is often a deficit financier and helps split the up-front costs of the shows. Some networks have their own studios, which can also make content for other networks.

Yes, it’s complicated. What’s important to remember is that there are executives in both places and they all have input into the creative. One reason a producer will go with the known director is that it’s simply faster and easier to hire someone who is easily approvable. And for women, what this means is that you have to overcome even more hurdles, and can be blocked at any stage of this process.

After the producers discuss that list with the networks and studio, there is usually a general agreement on a number of experienced directors, but some directors might be kiboshed or might not be available.

If directing slots are still open, producers usually go to the agencies to find out who is out there and available. How do the agencies work? Watch Entourage. And Peter Capaldi said he based his invective-spewing Malcolm Tucker on Hollywood agent-types.

Agents have their own agendas — mostly to get their commission. They don’t have a financial reason to care whether one of their clients gets a job vs. another. Is there any thought as to whom might be appropriate for any job? I have been told by many producers that agents just send their lists and leave the sorting work to the producers. The agent is a powerful middle man who can block you but won’t necessarily help you.

Producers will look at the work of the directors suggested to them. This is sometimes a reel, but more likely a sample episode of another show. Producers may also check references — especially if they know a producer from another show. It’s easier to call/email someone you know than dig deeper into a cold call. For directors unknown to the producers, there will often be interviews. These are strange beasts. They aren’t really assessing your skills, they are trying to evaluate the ‘fit-in’ factor.

Alyssa: What sort of discrimination and biases do women encounter in this process?

Rachel: That personality fit issue is where everything goes belly-up. Will the director fit in with that group of producers, actors and crew — what are the specifics for that? Recommendations and word-of-mouth? This is where the nepotism, cronyism and excuses make the decisions arbitrary. The most common excuse for not hiring a director is “We didn’t think they’d be a good fit”. That includes the excuse “The crew is hard on women” — as if that is the woman’s fault and the crew’s behavior is acceptable.

Minorities are also often left behind because they need the experience they couldn’t get five/ten/twenty years ago. When the hiring stalled in the mid-90’s, the train derailed.

In the machinery of television production, experience is valued. For a long run series that is shooting a new episode every 8 days, producers want to know that they can rely on directors to complete the work. In eight days, there isn’t time for a director to be trained and to experiment. There is a mandate to get the work completed. A lot of money is at stake for each episode.

This experience can also be genre-specific. Producers often ask to see shows you have directed that are similar to the one they are making — either in tone or scope or technical obstacles. Training an inexperienced director is a risk and time-consuming for the producers and crew.  

The other common excuse given is “We didn’t respond to your work.”  This is a wonderful catch-all answer because it’s so timey-wimey-slippery. You can ask ‘why not?’ but they aren’t really required to give a lucid answer because it’s an artistic judgment – a very safe platitude that means nothing.

I also see this argument a lot in internet-forum arguments: “We don’t care about gender or minorities, we just want the best person for the job.”

What criteria are you using? The main problem here is that except in exceptional cases, a director is hired for a slot (episode number/specific dates) on the show, not for a specific script. Scripts are not written for the director, they are written for the show. If you don’t know what script the director is shooting, how do you match the director appropriately?

So the hire is only about sensitivity to material in a bigger sense — does the director appear to have affinity for the genre — and then the prejudices come up about men being better at horror/action/special effects. Why? Because they are more believed when they talk about fighting or racing cars or adrenaline highs? Because they simply believe that woman aren’t interested in these things, aren’t technical enough, or don’t speak the right language to work with men and action?

Then the “Best Person” seems to be one with proven experience on that genre of show. It’s a Catch-22 — how do I get experience if I can’t get hired to gain the experience?

And the easy choice of producers to hire directors they already know is somewhat antithetical to the “Best Person” argument. Those directors are known quantities and safe, not necessarily the most relevant choice.

I hope this highlights how arbitrary this is.

Some people also argue that maybe women/minorities didn’t apply for the job, or not in the equal percentage as the men.

This argument makes me laugh (in a not-nice way, I admit).

There is no such thing as “applying for the job”. The Producers don’t pick up random resumes. That would be a total joke. The shop is closed. The system is broken, which is where the ACLU investigated and determined it was worthwhile speaking to the EEOC about the problems. The EEOC is in the process of conducting its own investigation. The EEOC must determine, on its own, whether there are civil rights violations in the hiring practices in Hollywood.

Directors can target specific shows that they want to work on. To do this, they mostly ask their agent to recommend them. Or if they know people who know people, from studio execs to producers, they will ask them to introduce them. It’s a big cocktail party of connections. And the better you are doing, the more control you have. Experience begets more opportunities, more experience.

When it comes to the woman director issues, I recommend @shitpeoplesaytowomendirectors — there are some gems on there. “Do the men actually listen to you?” “You can take the woman out of the kitchen…?” &%^%&$!!

I also recommend the second half of this article, which is really informative in terms of reasons why male producers do not like having women directors, and the “Worst Of” list from the DGA, which lists shows that have no women directors.