TV’s LGBTQ Representation Is Down, and Mass Cancellations Aren’t Helping
GLAAD’s “Where We Are on TV” study this year found a 6% decrease in the number of LGBTQ characters across broadcast, cable and streaming — and the cancellation/ending of shows surely isn’t helping matters.
Ahead of the latest study’s measurement period, the cancellation of Batwoman, Charmed, DC’s Legend of Tomorrow, 4400, Legacies and Naomi (on just The CW alone), plus Killing Eve, Claws, Dickinson, Astrid and Lily Save the World, The Wilds, Genera+ion, Y: The Last Man, Dear White People, Gentefied and Saved by the Bell (to name but a few), had already made a dent in LGBTQ representation.
But as reflected in this year’s report, the ending or upcoming ending of 54 shows such as Queer as Folk (which was home to 11 LBGTQ characters), Warrior Nun, Star Trek: Picard, Westworld, New Amsterdam, Reboot, Nancy Drew and Riverdale will result in the loss of no fewer than 140 LGBTQ characters — or 24 percent of all LGBTQ characters on TV. An additional 35 LGBTQ characters counted in this year’s study (which monitors shows that premiered or are expected to return between June 1, 2022 and May 31, 2023) will not be returning due to a character leaving the series or a closed-ended anthology or miniseries format.
Other top lines from this year’s 40-page report, which can be read in full here….
* GLAAD this year tallied 101 LGBTQ characters on broadcast, 139 LGBTQ characters on cable, and 356 LGBTQ characters on streaming (Apple TV+, Prime Video, Disney+, HBO Max, Hulu, Netflix, Peacock and Paramount+).
* The overall percentage of LGBTQ series regulars on scripted primetime broadcast TV is 10.6%, down 1.3 percentage points from last year’s record high; there were an additional 31 recurring LGBTQ characters, down from last year’s 49…. On scripted primetime cable, GLAAD counted 86 series regular LGBTQ characters, one fewer than last year; there were an additional 53 recurring LGBTQ characters, up two YOY…. GLAAD counted 239 LGBTQ series regular characters on streaming, down six less from last year’s count; there were an additional 117 LGBTQ recurring characters, up four from last year.
* Of the 596 LGBTQ characters counted across all three platforms, 35% were gay men, 30% were lesbians, 25% were bisexual+, 4% were queer, 2% were straight trans characters, 2% had an undetermined sexual orientation, and 1% were asexual. (Those marked as “undetermined” are transgender and/or nonbinary characters for whom networks were unable to confirm sexual orientations.)
* Across all platforms, GLAAD counted more LGBTQ women characters (52%) than men (44%), while 4% were nonbinary.
* The percentage of bisexual+ characters on TV (25%) continues to land far below the actual population of bisexual+ people, which account for 58% the LGBTQ community (per Gallup).
* For the first time since the 2014-15 report, HBO had the most LGBTQ characters on cable, with 26. That tally includes but is not limited to The Last of Us‘ Ellie, Somebody Somewhere and The White Lotus. Showtime, which is typically No. 1 in this measure among cablers, had 24 LGBTQ characters — down 11 year over year, and half of whom appeared in Season 4 of The L Word: Generation Q. Freeform followed with 16 LGBTQ characters, meaning that almost half of all LGBTQ characters on cable were accounted for by three networks. FX this year had 15 LGBTQ characters, followed by Starz’s 12, AMC’s 11 and Disney Channel’s 11 (including trans and gay characters on the animated freshman Marvel’s Moon Girl and Devil Dinosaur).
* Netflix (by the sheer volume of what it produces) led all streamers with 183 LGBTQ characters, followed by Prime Video’s 43 (including A League of Their Own and Harlem), Hulu’s 37 (including Reboot and Love, Victor), HBO Max’s 34, Peacock’s 24 (2o of whom are on now-cancelled shows), Disney+’s 14, Apple TV+’s 11 and Paramount+’s 10.
* Regarding racial diversity: On cable and streaming, at least 50 percent of LGBTQ characters on each platform were people of color. Broadcast-TV had met the 50% benchmark the past four years, but this time around delivered 48 percent. Of the LGBTQ characters who were POC, the breakdown is as follows: 20% Black, 14% Latino, 9% Asian/Pacific Islander, 4% multiracial, 3% Middle Eastern/North African characters, and 1% Indigenous.
* Several new broadcast-TV series feature central LGBTQ characters, including ABC’s The Rookie: Feds, The CW’s Gotham Knights and NBC’s Quantum Leap.
* Of the 596 LGBTQ characters counted in this report, only 27 (4.5%) have a disability, far below actual population estimates. What’s more, the three from broadcast-TV — Roswell, New Mexico‘s Sgt. Alex Manes and New Amsterdam‘s Dr. Bloom and Dr. Wilder — were from ended series. On cable, six of the nine LGBTQ characters living with disabilities were from the anthology American Horror Story: NYC, and thus won’t be seen again. Speaking of which,,,,
* GLAAD counted eight LGBTQ characters living with HIV — six from FX’s American Horror Story: NYC, and the remaining two from the cancelled series The Midnight Club and Queer as Folk.
Oh my God. SIX PERCENT. Won’t someone PLEASE think of the children!
Many of the cancelled series are niche, appealing to a specific demographic or taste, despite the makeup of cast and character. And with streamers leading in having the most LGBTQ characters, and the most shifts and cancellations in programming, these numbers are not surprising. I like seeing a gay character just being part of the proceedings. Just like life.
No one is forcing children to watch these shows which, truth be told, aren’t made for them anyway. Maybe parents could take the reins and be responsible for the little ones they brought into the world.
When I was a kid, gay people were depicted as funny, if not ridiculous characters on TV. For me, it was normal to hear my daily gay joke in school.
When my kids grew up, this started to change and nowadays my grandkids just see that “those” people are the same as anybody else.
You should not worry about the kids, you should be happy for them to see them grow up in a finally more normal world.
Says me, a very conservative old white man who nonetheless believes in science and good reason.
It was the same when I was growing up and I went along with jokes that I shouldn’t have. I am thankful to a tv show, “My So-Called Life,” for opening my eyes and changing my perspective. I know I can’t be the only one who was changed by Wilson Cruz’s performance. And that is why representation is important on television.
I absolutely loved that show as a teenager. So realistic, all of it.
The problem is not representation. It is the fact that some people prefer to see straight relationships because it appeals to their being in a straight relationship. It’s like for example when a woman is pining for a man and she wants to see her favorite male character and a heterosexual relationship but then theirs a gay relationship instead. She is more likely to find another show that fulfills her sexual needs and desires. She might stick with the show but she isn’t going to stay with something that doesn’t get her heart feels. I’m just saying that is an issue and it’s more so with women then I think men because I like Nancy Drew and it has a lesbian and that doesn’t bother me because I like her personality and how she fits with the Nancy gang as a whole plus I love the whole mystic and mystery vibe.
Then again, procedural stuff are different because when the plots are well written you don’t really care about the character’s sex lives regardless if the characters are gay or straight: the relationships, if featured, takes you out of the plot. Audience don’t watch Rick and Morty, 9-1-1 or The Good Doctor because of a main love interest, they watch it because of the plot. And if there’s a relationship within it, it’s secondary to said plot.
And Wilson Cruz continues to amaze and educate, he is a major talent and one of the world’s best people.
Nice Simpsons reference lol *most people over thought your comment 😂
You obviously missed the part where it soon will be closer to 25%. That’s a devastating loss for a community desperately needing representation and hope as legislatures across the country attack LGBTQ rights, drag shows, being able to say authentic while in school, and more.
Hopefully the 25% dip will not happen. Does that include new series confirmed for next year? Or is it just looking at what shows are ending? Because that method would show a decrease in representation of any and all demographics.
OMG, watch out for the children!! Please! The children understand a lot more than you do, that the “Gay Society” is not out to get them and that they actually have friends that are. It’s the parents like you, who distort their young minds and teach them differently. Do you also warn them against people of a different color than them? Racism is racism no matter which way you look at it. Lord, I sincerely hope one of your children (if you have any,) doesn’t come out to you.
Gee, I don’t see that as a problem.
I’m GLAAD you’re so proud of your bigotry.
How exactly is what she said Bigotry? Did she in anyway suggest that LGBTQ people shouldn’t exist? You can have a an issue with LGBTQ+ representation on TV but not with the group themselves. They are over represented currently and in a large amount of cases that’s not because they have interesting stories to tell about these groups, it’s lazy box ticking, sometimes ending up in ham-fisted preaching.
If it’s quality story telling I don’t think many people would have an issue if 90% of the characters on screen were LGBTQ+ because good story telling generally trumps everything, you don’t need to be able to fully relate to enjoy well told stories, I didn’t need to know anything about American Football and especially high school American Football to enjoy FNL for example but when it’s box ticking and that negativity impacts the quality of the storytelling (and can even shape the story in a negative way, for example keeping a LGBTQ+ character around to prevent backlash when their story is done, keeping any character around when their story is done is usually bad for TV as they have to be forced into situations that don’t make logical sense) then people can justifiably care and shouldn’t have to put up with people like you calling them names without anything ti base that on
@Simon – Clearly reading between the lines isn’t your forte’. Her “Gee” says it all.
Exactly. And frankly, anyone complaining about “preaching” is a homophobe as well, even if they mask it with 100 words about character development.
Since when has ‘gee’ been the same as ‘stone to death all lgbtq+ people’?
Gee when used in context with the second part of the sentence is an expression of enthusiasm but there is nothing in the second part to tell you why, you and the person I replied to are choosing to assume it’s for bigoted reasons but that you choosing to do that so you can name call. Even in long form it’s hard to be able to infer intention of the written word unless the words are very specific but implying someone’s intention from just a line is impossible
This whole article is about LGBTQ+ representation. Something to pass over if you don’t care about LGBTQ+ representation. Please don’t try to gaslight those of us that can read and understand when someone does not care about LGBTQ+ representation – or worse yet, cares to lessen LGBTQ+ representation. Sue saying “Gee, I don’t see that as a problem” is very easy to understand. She doesn’t see a problem with less LGBTQ+ representation. I don’t think I’m traveling too far out on that limb in assuming that Sue means she’s happy with less LGBTQ+ representation. And same with you George.
Frankly, all of the ‘box ticking’ comments are rather insulting. They just assume that when a gay person shows up on screen, it’s only because the producers are ticking the ‘gay box. Feels like bigotry hiding behind such allegations. As a gay senior, I get enough bigotry in real life, without these condescending comments.
Didn’t mean this as a reply to the comment above. No idea why it posted here. Lol
I’m sorry you have to see these openly homophobic comments from people using bigoted code words that they think are masking their hatred.
I guess you’re not very good with sarcasm now are you Simon?
How can her comment be construed as anything BUT bigotry? I kind of wish TVLine would turn off comments when they post something like this.
How sad it must be for you that, after decades of being mostly ignored or written in code, that LGBTQIA people are now over-represented…just barely. You don’t really know what percent of the population of this country is actually part of this community because we love to conduct surveys which engage in “laxy box ticking”.
And, please, dazzle us with your many examples of LGBTQIA characters who are unrelatable and purposeless. For every one you list, I’ll bet I can list at least a couple examples of white characters who serve even less of a purpose/with whom many viewers wouldn’t be able to engage.
You criticized the previous poster for making claims “without anything to base that on” but you didn’t offer an iota of evidence that these gay characters were just kept around or written into the storyling to check a box or to appease the gay community.
You can’t cloak your bigotry with such empty rhetoric.
Basically, YES, she did. Try to use your brain a little dude.
Hey Sue, why did you even bother to comment (let alone read this article). It’s clear you don’t care about representation. FWIW, you do know this site is run by a member of the LGBTQ+ community
So you’re saying that TV shows with more “representation” weren’t popular enough to keep their time slots and production budgets for another season?
Let me clear this up for you… they’ve failed for the same reason that televangelists aren’t THAT popular… most people don’t WANT to be preached at.
How is having LGBTQ characters preaching at you?
Provide us precise details on how relationships that happen all over the country being shown on a TV show are preaching at you.
Sure… as soon as you provide precise details on how drag queen story hours for children are normal.
[COMMENT REMOVED BY MODERATOR]
The only time I felt ‘preached at’ was the trans episode of Quantum Leap. That episode felt like an afterschool special or an overly long PSA.
Wow, you call seeing LGBTQ people on TV being preached at? What rock do you live under? Know what is preachy, you saying you’re being preached at by a group that is glad you’re not part of it. Stick with your heteronormativity, popping out babies like they’re Pez, soaking up government benefits and being freaking miserable all day long. Smiling and laughing and enjoying others no matter who they love, is fun, and interesting, and a whole lot different than being preachy. It’s called acceptance. Im sure people accept you and your miserable attitude, don’t they? Even though they shouldn’t but they do, so why can’t you accept others? Doth thou protest too much I think.
Except there are a number of other factors like the sales of CW and HBO Max at work here. But given that LGBTQ people are under attack and Christians aren’t as hateful bills pass across this country…even though I agree with the other comments that representation is not preaching….some of you need preached to over and over until your tiny bigoted heads finally get it.
What a waste of time was even checking this article!
Actually, the bigger waste of time was reading these comments. I expected bigotry and ignorance…and both were delivered in spades.
Because the headline didn’t clue you in to the subject???
Seems like still over-represented compared to real life demographics.
According to a Axios poll in early 2022. Millennials surveyed 10% identified as LGTBQ and Gen Z 20% identified as LGTBQ. Those would be the audiences they are aiming at for those are the ones that would be more likely to go out and buy products. Most of the shows listed seem to be aimed at those audiences. I doubt the remake of Matlock is going to aimed at them. It is also why the representation is higher for streaming.
Hmm…So gays and lesbians have always been 5-7 percent of the population but that number suddenly, magically, jumps to 20 percent in just one generation?
Nah. That’s just a very confused, weaned on social media, approval-craving Gen Z crying out, DESPERATELY, for attention.
They haven’ ALWAYS been 5-7. The numbers started off low due to underreporting.
This assumes that the only TV content relevant to such a consideration is new content. There’s a 50+ year archive of TV content (some significant part of it available to watch through streaming services, cable reruns, and/or home video) that was almost devoid of any LGBTQ representation or mention.
Reason and math are not your forte, are they little fella?
Of course it is. According to writers/directors/producers I know, when projects are pitched now they often aren’t approved unless they agree to “diversify” up the cast. That’s why you see over-representation of pretty much everyone except for straight, White people.
I love how people keep throwing out the “real life demographics” line as though they think it’s a valid argument. ‘Cause it’s not like that number can’t/won’t go up as time goes on and more people become comfortable coming out or anything, right? And on the flip side, there are plenty of people out there who have yet to come out for various reasons or are still figuring out their sexual orientation. So those “real life demographics” you speak of may actually be higher than one presumes.
.
Besides that, I’m just going to say the same thing here that people always say to shut down anyone who points out how unrealistic it is when a show featuring a cast full of straight, white people doesn’t accurately reflect the demographics of where the characters are supposed to live (like New York City or L.A., for instance): “It’s fiction. Get over it.” If they are overrepresented on TV compared to real life, who cares? Why does or should that matter?
The streaming services to very little to advertise their LGBTQ characters. When they do have a menu option for LGBT content, it’s usually only relevant if the main characters fit into those categories so a lot of times those characters go unnoticed unless you watch a show for another reason. It seems like an easy fix to tag shows with LGBT characters for those watchers that are specifically looking for representational content, but they’re doing a poor job at it at the moment. And when we do see LGBT characters, they’re often not written to quality and are still relegated to the “best friend” or the “funny coworker” roles that have become outdated. I’ve started to listen to more audiobooks because television and streaming executives are still about the box-ticking instead of pushing for well-written characters with dynamic stories. And with all the people in these comments bashing the article because of the type of fictional characters it mentions, I’m not really surprised.
Producers should focus on quality TV shows – not just checking boxes.
Agreed. Get the best people no matter what.
Couldn’t agree more so true
Easy to say when you and your kind are represented pretty much everywhere. When you’re the minority and want to see yourself, then you can talk about representation as though it means nothing. One day, white men will be the minority and I cannot wait. Honestly. I’m counting down the days. It’s like minorities get treated different or something. Huh.
Full disclosure, I am gay. With that said: “Your Kind” are missing the point. It’s not about excluding anyone. It’s about writing a quality, entertaining story first and casting to that. It’s organic. Hollywood suffers from the same problem the current administration does…checking woke boxes first and competence is an afterthought. If a gay character adds nuance to the role and story, that’s great. But don’t force it for the sake of false equity. Not every household, workplace or neighborhood is overrun with LGBTQ people, as Hollywood would have us believe. As much as the woke supremacists want to make them the majority…they simply are NOT. Keep it real.
I value quality TV. I can’t think of a single show that suffered quality because they had an LGBTQ character. You might want to check your internalized homophobia if you’re too anti-woke to feel the same. Calling them “supremacists”, I have no doubt you vote for the very people who are currently stripping you/us of our rights.
This is THE comment of the thread! Well said!
The first factoid from the GLAAD report is wrong: 101 LGBTQ on broadcast, *down* from 141 last year.
https://www.glaad.org/whereweareontv22
Good catch; their press release had it incorrect. Fixed. –Mgmt.
This kind of feels insulting. That its has become a numbers game. There can be thin line between pandering and representation. People sort of make a big deal there is LGBTQ character, isn’t that the opposite of we are trying achieve? Like I just want to part of your group.
This makes me appreciate NCIS:Hawaii even more. Only once have they made it a big deal that Kacy are a same-sex couple. That was when Kate’s boss assumed she was dating a guy.
Otherwise, they are just a normal couple who go through typical relationship stuff.
Almost every show I watch with LGBTQ characters is like that these days.
With individual characters that may be true,, but with couples, most of the stories still focus on whole loving same sex person
If you see a difference between showing the romance of a heterosexual couple and the romance of a homosexual couple, that is on YOU. Showing their romances equally is NOT pushing an agenda; it’s showing real life. Some of us happen to love people of the same gender! Or love multiple genders! Or are trans and/or love someone who is trans! I’m not sure I agree with Chuck but at least he could see that equivalence of being a typical relationship with NCIS: Hawaii, so I’m not sure what your point is about couples?
It’s funny that ‘representation’ appears to be more important that actual content.
As an example, much was made about The Last of Us’ prominent display of LGTBQ characters but little addressing the actual story narratives of those characters. Merely appearing on screens was seen as an inherent positive regardless of how/what their storylines portrayed.
Whether Ellie’s doomed lesbian first love, or Nick Offerman’s supposed survivalist romance, the series didn’t exactly depict those relationships in a positive light. Offerman’s episode stands out starkly, especially as the season concluded, in a manner that mirrors the worst homophobic tropes about the ‘unnatural’ dead ends that are gay couples. That he and his partner ended up alone and decaying in an empty neighbourhood, whereas even the cannibal preacher had fostered a decent number of followers, isn’t exactly a ringing endorsement of the LGTBQ community.
The numbers are still good. “Down from last year” doesn’t automatically mean the numbers themselves are bad.
But they’re projected to get worse.
They have cancelled some really good shows this year, I personally don’t care if a character is gay or not, it’s the show as a whole that matters and all of the actors matter, regardless of their sexual preference. Legacies was a big loss, I thought it was just as good as the Vampire Diaries in a fresher way. I guess all the networks are concerned with is money, as they should to a point, but some shows need room to grow and it seems that if they don’t double their investment in the first few episodes, they consider it a loss. And popular show ‘s are no longer allowed a slump period, they all have one for one reason or another. The CW is a mystery to me, they have had consistently great, money making shows including Supernatural, etc. So how did they go broke? Poor money management, embezzlement, I mean hoe do you go from a super station to broke within one season? It’s to bad for us I guess, we have lost some great shows across the spectrum of networks, and some for no apparent reason.
Thanks for reporting GLAAD’s comprehensive statistical breakdown – I look forward to reading it every year. I am unhappy that more progress is not being made in fair representation. The past year has seen such a disastrous and truly dangerous assault on LGBTQ rights and it’s frightening to think how many cruel politicians are basing their platforms on denying people their basic human rights to live and love in dignity and peace. It hurts my heart. 💔
I look at the comments and the shows are being canceled because people aren’t watching them. It all comes down to making money. The studios and bosses want money. So if people are not watching these shows for whatever reason they will be cancelled!!
All I wanna know .. is NEIL PATRICK HARRIS NETFLIX SHOW PICKED UP FOR A SECOND SEASON? LOVE THAT SHOW
Yes and no. It was dropped by Netflix BUT picked up by Showtime for S2. 🤞
Showtime shows will also air on the upper tier of Paramount+ (the one without ads). Those in the lower tier (with ads) unfortunately do not get the access to Showtime fare.
So we’re going back to the “appease middle America” route they did in the 90s where heaven forbid Andrea on 90210 be a proud Jew or date a black guy. Fun times those were. Because you know, middle America has so much money and so many people they are worth the amount of people who could and should cancel subscriptions at a time when every figure matters. I mean, LA County has more people than most of middle America but yes, we need more Yellowstone shows without the woke. But that’s okay, do your “appease middle America,” which is code for bigotry and white straights and black straights, no interracial couples, no mixed-faith couples, no LGBTQ people because that’s reflective of actual society. 🙄. It’s only reflective of the one they want – white, straight, cisgender folks only apply. How boring.
Speaking as a straight, white person from middle America (Iowa, to be more specific), I fully agree with your post. I am beyond sick and tired of network executives thinking everyone in this part of the country will automatically think the same way and will automatically be averse to seeing anything with even a hint of diversity or progressive ideas/themes. Contrary to what many like to believe, there are plenty of us in this part of the country who are much more liberal-minded and open to more variety in our programming and characters. It’d be really nice if executives (and people in general, really) realized and acknowledged that more.
I’ll cosign to everything you said… being a joyously liberal tiny blue dot in a deep South state where Governor MeeMaw is passing more discriminating laws against women and the LGBTQ community seemingly with no respite within sight. I love and openly champion diversity and equal representation – and so do a heckuva lot of my neighbors. Any friends or family with restrictive beliefs are no longer welcome in my life. That may seem overly harsh but I must preserve my sanity and sense of well-being. “I” must be able to live with “me” and my varied circle is now so enlightening and uplifting. Open minds exhibiting open hearts!
Of all the shows mentioned the one that stands out that got me the most upset that it was cancelled is Warrior Nun as it had a great story regardless of the very limited LGBTQ storyline. Which had no impact overall on the story or main arc.
To be honest, amidst all the streaming, network and movies out there it’s hard to keep track of the shows and franchises one actually follows, much less the characters’s sexual orientation within those shows and franshises one follows.
So? LGBTQ people are all around us.
The attempted suicide rate among LGBTQ teens is twice that of heterosexual teens – 18% vs 9%. Then there’s the harassment, the bullying, the physical violence directed at LGBTQ youth, reinforced by ignorant, ugly legislation.
I came out, in high school, more than a decade before GLAAD was created. I’ve never watched, or not, a TV show because of it’s inclusion, or not, of LGBTQ characters. Does inclusion in a show I’d watch anyway – I’m thinking of Bell, and Nova, in L&O Organized Crime – matter? Yes, very much so.
Gee, a mere 6% drop? The more important numbers include that only 54 shows (now dropped) account for 24% of all LGBTQ characters, and that LGBTQ ‘series regulars’ on broadcast TV has dropped 10%. As for ‘it’s just box-ticking’ – if there’s only 101 LGBTQ characters on all of broadcast TV, I’d say the networks aren’t doing too well with checking off those boxes.
“Think of the children”? Darn right! Our LGBTQ kids are exactly who we’re thinking of. If counting characters or box-ticking helps keep even a handful of LGBTQ teens from becoming statistics in suicide, homicide, and homeless population tallies, all I can say to those who don’t approve is get over it, or watch something else.
I don’t agree with the 6% drop as you or the spokesperson claims.
At one time yes they were very unfairly underrepresented in all aspects of any sort of media. T.V film stage etc etc..
Now I think they are overrepresented. Name a single show that started in the last few years that does not have one in.
In-fact other groups are far behind in representation, not many shows have disabled characters, as but one example.
T.V should represent the community, in this I agree but such a statement of a 6% drop in this group, I just don’t believe.
I’m sure with Nexstar getting their way, the number on the CW is going to go way down.