#OscarsSoWhite

Nominations for the 2016 Academy Awards were announced last week and the notable lack of minority nominees has sparked major outrage. The hashtag #OscarsSoWhite is trending for the second consecutive year after, once again, no minority actor was nominated in any acting category.

The controversy has heightened as several celebrities have spoken out against the Academy of Motion Picture and Sciences, the organization that awards the Oscars, and its continued lack of diversity representation and recognition over several decades. What makes this issue more interesting is that the Academy's president Cheryl Boone Isaacs is black, the first black to hold the position in its history.

A few major entertainers have spoken out against the nominations including British actor David Oyelowo, a member of the Academy who was notably shunned last year in the best actor category for his portrayal of American icon Martin Luther King Jr. Others include movie director Spike Lee, actors Viola Davis, George Clooney and Reese Witherspoon (also an Academy member,) and documentary filmmaker Michael Moore. Some celebrities like husband and wife acting powerhouse Will Smith and Jada Pinkett Smith are choosing to boycott the ceremony. Music legend Quincy Jones, the first black member of the Academy, who says he has been asked to present, said he will only accept the invitation if he is allowed to address the issue before he presents his award. And many in the black community are calling for Chris Rock, this year's host, to pull out of his obligation.

I disagree.

Not with the continued failure to recognize movies and actors with minority backgrounds, which is an inexplicable travesty, but with the idea that Rock should back out of hosting. In fact, Rock might be the most important voice in the black community to speak against the problem; if he chooses to do so. Without his comments, this issue remains only an issue until the show airs. Then it dies a sudden death. But if Rock has anything to add to this debate, on a live stage, then it'll be time-stamped in history for decades to come. Much like the video of Eddie Murphy at the 1988 awards has been circulated as a yardstick to judge how little the academy has come in addressing the problem in two decades. Yet even if Rock doesn't plan to say anything, isn't it at least better to make the show's producers and academy members worry about just what he might say to add fuel to the fire? This sentiment is shared by comedian Ricky Gervais, who's known for his controversial comments as a multiple host of the Golden Globes.

As a very polarized nation, it's virtually impossible to not have issues involving race or diversity pop up every so often. Some are very much warranted, others, not so much. But because of America's detailed history of racial discrimination, it is imperative to spend some time discussing whether or not any topic involving race is warranted. It's a no-brainer that the killing and persecution of blacks nationwide stands at the top of the racial debate, but is this #OscarsSoWhite issue really warranted? Were there roles good enough to stand with the best of them this year?

Yes; particularly these male actors:

Idris Elba, whose role as a fictitious African warlord in Beasts of no Nation was more than spectacular. He convincingly portrayed a ruthless soldier that any West African native like me (I am Nigerian) will find similarities to many guerrilla leaders in war-torn countries like Sierra Leone and Liberia.

Abraham Attah: The breakout star of Beasts was 14-year-old Attah, who had never acted before landing the role of an 11-year-old captured and trained by Elba to become a child soldier. This young boy was such a natural and, in my opinion, deserved a nod for equally holding his own alongside such a seasoned actor as Elba. His performance was reminiscent of Quvenzhane Wallis' Oscar-nominated performance as narrator and actor in Beasts of the Southern Wild.

Abraham Attah (middle) was captivating in his first acting role

Michael B. Jordan: A couple of years ago, Jordan was overlooked for his compelling portrayal of Oscar Grant, a black man shot and killed by a police officer at a San Francisco train station, in the movie Fruitvale Station. This year, he packed on the pounds, muscle build and finesse to play unseasoned boxer Adonis Johnson, the son of Apollo Creed, Rocky Balboa's biggest rival turned best friend, in the movie Creed. The movie earned Sylvester Stallone his second Oscar acting nomination, nearly 40 years after his first nod for portraying the same character. This movie could not have been as successful as it was without the chemistry between Jordan and Stallone. But while Stallone didn't need to stretch himself too much in developing his character, Jordan had to reinvent himself as a legitimate boxer. His crucial fight scene was shot in one take!

Omissions like these prove there's no actual rhyme or reason to these nominations. A selection of voters–no one really knows who gets this honor–choose their favorites from more than 300 movies. What we do know is that about 94% of the Academy's members are white, and 77% of them are male, according to the LA Times, whose 2012 study of the Academy was based on 5,100 members (the Academy currently has 6,300 members.) The study also showed that the median age of members was 62 while members aged 50 or younger constituted only 14% of its membership.

How do you expect an older white generation to make any connection to a movie such as Straight Outta Compton when they barely have any clue about the black or Latino experience? The few times blacks have won as actors were primarily for their roles in movies with a slavery or oppressive theme, which, members to connect to quite frequently. So maybe there weren't as many quality roles for minorities to choose from this year as some may argue, but what about last year? Were quality performances from the likes of Oyelowo and Selma director Ava Duvernay enough to get them nominations? If your guess is no, you happen to be right.

The increasing calls for boycotts forced a response from the Academy with Isaacs announcing that the Academy's 51-member Board of Governors will discuss ways to address diversity in its upcoming meeting. An LA Times writer suggests that one of the proposed changes might involve expanding the number of actors nominated. This couldn't be further from the ideal solution. By increasing the  nominees to 10, the Academy insults, not includes, minorities. It comes across as more of a passive recognition intended to quiet the kind of negative publicity the organization currently faces. Besides, throwing a few minorities into a mix of 10 does not guarantee a win, especially given the abysmal number of blacks who have won in the Oscar's history. Take for example Chiwetel Ejiofor, who carried the entire movie 12 Years a Slave, which won the best picture two years ago, but lost out to Matthew McConaughey for playing a skinny, HIV+ Texan (he didn't even have to alter his accent,) who illegally sells cheap medication to the Dallas HIV community in Dallas Buyers Club.

Sadly, until we have enough minorities in the decision-making positions, both in funding movies for production and in the nomination process, we will continue to see this lack of diversity. As Oyelowo said during his speech at a gala honoring Isaacs last week, "For 20 opportunities to celebrate actors of color, actresses of color, to be missed last year is one thing; for that to happen again this year is unforgivable."