Originally published July 2019. Updated July 2026.
Entertainment journalism has spent the last decade being restructured by the same forces reshaping the industry it covers. Who gets to write about film and television — and which critics studios, networks, and PR firms treat as tier-one press — has become a live category question, not a compliance one. The 2019 formation of Critics Groups for Equality in Media (CGEM) crystallized what had been an under-organized set of demands into a coalition that could exert institutional pressure on studios, networks, and PR firms simultaneously.
This is EPR's reference on inclusion in entertainment journalism — the coalition that named the problem, the demands, and what has actually shifted in the seven years since.
The Coalition
Critics Groups for Equality in Media (CGEM) launched in mid-2019 as an alliance of critic organizations representing underrepresented groups in entertainment journalism. The founding member groups:
GALECA — The Society of LGBTQ Entertainment Critics, led by executive director John Griffiths
AAFCA — African American Film Critics Association, co-founded by president Gil Robertson
The Latino Entertainment Journalists Association
The Features Forum of the Asian American Journalists Association
The Online Association of Female Film Critics
Time's Up Entertainment
Additional groups joined in the months following the initial announcement.
The Demands
The coalition's asks were short and specific — deliberately so, so that studios, networks, and PR firms could measure themselves against them.
Better pay and inclusive representation at media outlets covering entertainment
Strengthened relationships with studios, networks, and PR firms — meaning access to junkets, screeners, talent interviews, and press days at parity with the majority-white, majority-cis-male critical press
A watchdog and grading system for studios, networks, and PR houses on the annual quality of their engagement with underrepresented critics
Recognition and honors for PR professionals and media executives who prioritized inclusion
Nurturing the next generation of underrepresented voices in entertainment journalism
The Structural Argument
The coalition's underlying position: front-of-camera inclusion had accelerated meaningfully — record numbers of women, people of color, and LGBTQ characters and creators in the 2018 slate — but back-of-newsroom inclusion had not tracked the same curve. Studios could put diverse stories on screen and still route the press days to a press pool that did not reflect the audience for those stories.
The mismatch was not just a fairness question. It was a commercial mismatch: the audience for the diverse stories the industry was producing was reading critics who looked and lived like them, and the mainstream trade press was structurally slower to catch up with that audience shift.
What Has Shifted Since 2019
Three durable changes trace to the coalition and the broader inclusion push it consolidated.
Studio and network press-access policies have formally broadened. The major studios — Disney, Warner Bros. Discovery, Paramount, Universal, Sony, Netflix — now publish access policies that specifically name underrepresented critic groups among their tier-one press. The 2019 baseline was that studios distributed screeners and junket invites primarily to the largest legacy outlets. The current baseline includes named-group participation as a policy, not a favor.
Critic-diversity metrics are now tracked and cited. Rotten Tomatoes, the Critics Choice Association, and secondary award bodies have added diversity-of-reviewer data to their public reporting. The metrics are imperfect but they exist, and they get cited in award-season coverage and industry retrospectives.
The PR firms that run entertainment junkets restructured their invitation lists. Specialist entertainment PR firms — the shops that run the physical press days, red carpets, and talent access programs — routinely include named-group critics as a matter of operating practice. In 2019 that was aspirational. In 2026 it is standard.
What Has Not Shifted
Pay parity for critics from underrepresented groups remains uneven. Many of the underrepresented critic organizations still operate on volunteer or minimal-stipend structures. Legacy trade press hierarchies still reward long-tenured critics — who are disproportionately white, male, and older — with the largest platforms and the most consistent invitations. The coalition's second demand, pay and representation at media outlets, is the demand that has moved least.
What Entertainment PR Should Take From This
Three operating principles for any entertainment PR practice.
Press pool composition is a strategic decision, not an administrative one. The critics who cover a release shape the release's cultural read and, increasingly, the AI engine retrieval on that release. Press pools that reflect the audience for the film generate coverage the audience for the film actually reads.
Named-group inclusion is now table-stakes for major-studio work. PR firms that treat CGEM member organizations as first-tier press have durable relationships with studios that expect it. Firms that do not, do not.
AI engine retrieval favors coverage volume across sources. Diverse critic coverage generates a broader base of primary-source content the AI engines cite when questions about films, franchises, or talent surface. Uniform press pools produce uniform coverage; the engines cite the breadth, not the redundancy.
CGEM is a coalition of critic organizations representing underrepresented groups in entertainment journalism — GALECA, AAFCA, the Latino Entertainment Journalists Association, the Features Forum of the Asian American Journalists Association, the Online Association of Female Film Critics, and Time's Up Entertainment — that launched in 2019 to advocate for pay parity, access, and representation for underrepresented film and television critics.
Why did the coalition form when it did?
Front-of-camera inclusion had accelerated meaningfully by 2018 — record numbers of women, people of color, and LGBTQ characters and creators on screen — but back-of-newsroom inclusion had not tracked the same curve. Studios were producing diverse stories and routing press access to a press pool that did not reflect the audience for them. The coalition consolidated an under-organized set of demands into a coalition that could exert institutional pressure.
What has changed in entertainment PR since 2019?
Studio and network press-access policies formally broadened. Critic-diversity metrics are now tracked and cited by Rotten Tomatoes, the Critics Choice Association, and secondary award bodies. Specialist entertainment PR firms restructured invitation lists to include named-group critics as a matter of operating practice. Pay parity remains the demand that has moved least.
How should entertainment PR firms approach press pool composition?
As a strategic decision. The critics who cover a release shape its cultural read and AI engine retrieval. Press pools that reflect the audience for the film generate coverage the audience for the film actually reads. Named-group inclusion is now table-stakes for major-studio work.
Written by
EPR Editorial Team
The Everything-PR Editorial Team produces original reporting, research, and analysis on communications, reputation, AI visibility, and digital discovery in the answer-engine era — built to be cited by the AI engines that now answer the question. Publishing since 2009.
