Representation in advertising: Are there really too many Black people featured in ads?

When Channel 4 released its latest Mirror on the Industry report, it was only a matter of time before its findings on representation in advertising were drawn into wider culture war debates. The tendency to seek outrage over insight has become familiar, particularly amid increasingly divisive times.

The Daily Mail’s headline captured this dynamic: “Why are so many adverts now more interested in diversity than in the reality of British life?” The piece went on to accuse the industry of “race-related virtue signalling” and claimed that “so much television advertising is now about following a politically correct agenda [...] Advertisers and their clients seem to have developed an objection to white people.”

This framing centred on one finding that the proportion of adverts featuring Black people rose sharply after the Black Lives Matter movement, from 37% in 2020 to 51% in 2022, and has remained stable since. By contrast, Black people make up around 4% of the population of England and Wales, according to the 2021 census.

The Mail was not alone in drawing comparative lines between groups. Similar narratives in other coverage pointed to how adverts “over-represent Black people while ignoring the over-70s.” The effect, albeit not as pointed, is similar: a comparative framing that turns inclusion into a zero-sum exercise, where one group’s visibility is treated as another’s exclusion.

What the Data Actually Showed

The research, conducted by the agency Tapestry, for Channel 4, audited 500 of the UK’s top adverts across broadcasters. It found:

• Black people featured in 51% of adverts (up from 37% in 2020), while making up 4% of England and Wales’ population.

• South Asians appeared in 17% (up from 13% in 2023), compared to 8% of the population.

• East Asians featured in 11% (1% of the population).

• Disabled people remained at just 4% of adverts, unchanged since 2018, despite representing nearly 18% of the population.

• LGBTQIA+ people featured 2% of the time, below both their 3% population share and the previous five-year average.

  
  

The data shows some visible progress in diversity, but also a persistent imbalance. Importantly, the purpose of the report was not to suggest “over-representation” but to highlight progress and limitations that the industry should consider whilst also assessing the quality and authenticity of how different groups appear.

The Real Story: Tokenism and Time on Screen

This brought forth the key finding that while representation is broadening, screen time and storytelling depth remain uneven.

Montage-style adverts, for example, are increasingly common. They feature a diverse range of faces, but often in fleeting or superficial ways. The study found that 87% of tokenistic portrayals occur in these formats, which indicates that quantity does not necessarily correlate with full inclusivity.

While visibility has improved, authenticity still lags behind. The report’s recommendation is not to reduce diversity, but to invest in better, research-informed storytelling that reflects lived experience.

To its credit, the Daily Mail did highlight one important issue:

“The virtue-signalling of industry leaders is riven with hypocrisy, since they do not appear to extend the same pious devotion to the career prospects of minority groups who work behind the camera.”

This point aligns with what many in the industry have long argued, that inclusion must extend beyond who appears on screen to who holds creative control. However, it is notable that this observation was framed as a critique of diversity efforts rather than a call to strengthen them.

As Bobi Carley, Director of Industry Relations & Inclusion Co-Lead at ISBA, notes:

“Representation in advertising is not a nice-to-have. It’s a business imperative and a moral responsibility. Too many communities remain invisible or inauthentically portrayed. Brands have the power to change this.”

Representation in advertising Isn’t a Numbers Game

At The Unmistakables, we often talk about two types of representation:

• Reflective, which mirrors the population as it is.

• Aspirational, which reflects the society we want to build.

  
  

Both matter. Representation should not only be about numerical accuracy relative to the population but also about ensuring that people see themselves authentically reflected in the media they consume and the industries that shape it. 

So rather than asking whether diversity has “gone too far,” a more constructive question might be: how can inclusion for more groups be achieved with authenticity?

If these questions are the ones that you are asking in your boardrooms, please contact us. We know what to do.