Hollywood producer Janet Yang has been named the new president of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences by the organization’s Board of Governors. Yang, who is of Chinese descent, is the first Asian person ever to hold the position and the fourth woman behind Fay Kanin (1979-1983), Cheryl Boone Isaacs (2013-2017) and Bette Davis (Davis resigned after two months in 1941).

Yang is beginning her first term as president and her second term as a Governor-at-Large. The Board also voted on the officers, electing:

• Teri E. Dorman, Vice President (chair, Membership Committee)
• Donna Gigliotti, Vice President/Secretary (chair, Governance Committee)
• Lynette Howell Taylor, Vice President (chair, Awards Committee)
• Larry Karaszewski, Vice President (chair, History and Preservation Committee)
• David Linde, Vice President/Treasurer (chair, Finance Committee)
• Isis Mussenden, Vice President (chair, Museum Committee)
• Kim Taylor-Coleman, Vice President (chair, Equity and Inclusion Committee)
• Wynn P. Thomas, Vice President (chair, Education and Outreach Committee)

“Janet is a tremendously dedicated and strategic leader who has an incredible record of service at the Academy,” said Bill Kramer, Academy CEO. “I am thrilled that she is taking on the esteemed role of Academy President and look forward to working closely with her on our shared vision to serve our membership, celebrate the collaborative arts and sciences of motion pictures, and inspire the next generation of filmmakers.”

Yang, 66, is an established figure in Hollywood who has worked with filmmakers including Oliver Stone and Kathryn Bigelow. Her previous credits include “The Joy Luck Club” (1993), “The People vs. Larry Flynt” (1996) and the Oscar-nominated “Over the Moon” (2020). A member of the Academy’s Producers Branch since 2002, Yang most recently served on the Board as vice president and chair of the Membership Committee and, before that, the Membership and Governance Committee. She is also co-chair of the Academy’s Asian Affinity Group.

One governor described her to Variety as “a very smart and seasoned professional” back in July.

Read more: Variety’s Awards Circuit Oscars Predictions Hub

Per the Academy bylaws, presidents are elected for one-year terms and cannot be elected for more than four consecutive terms. Yang follows past presidents including well-known figures such as Frank Pierson, Karl Malden and Gregory Peck.

Last year set a record for the number of scripted original series for adults, but the “Peak TV” era probably hasn’t peaked just yet, at least if you ask FX Chairman John Landgraf. (As the television executive who coined the term, Landgraf would be a good person to ask. Then again, he’s made this claim before.)

During an executive session at the Television Critics Association press tour Tuesday, the FX brand’s boss offered some tea-leaf reading about the seemingly never-ending output of more and more TV shows. “2022 will be the high watermark — in other words, that it will mark the peak of the ‘Peak TV’ era,” he said.

Landgraf has been wrong before, and he’s the first to admit that his prediction might be done “foolishly.” But he has data on his side, courtesy of the number-crunchers at FX research.

The first half of 2022 saw 357 scripted series launch across broadcast, cable, and streaming. That’s up 16 percent compared to the same time last year. And last year’s 559 shows set an all-time record, up 13 percent from the COVID-fueled decline in 2020 and up 23 percent from five years earlier.

“Due to the pandemic, getting a true read on where scripted-series output might hit its top has been hard,” Landgraf said. “This year we’ve seen a tidal wave of scripted programming thanks to the bottleneck of COVID-delayed production finally clearing up.”

Back in 2015, speaking to the same audience of TV critics and reporters, Landgraf predicted that the number of scripted series would hit its peak in 2015 or 2016. He amended that the following year when he said he expected the peak to hit in 2019 followed by a decline the next year, when he bemoaned that there was “simply too much television” and warned of “oversupply” and the negative impact of tech monopolies on creativity.

So much has changed since then, including Landgraf’s tenor. Tuesday’s forecast came with no warnings or caveats; he painted it as “sticking my neck out” for some fun. Now, Landgraf’s employer Disney is one of the top streaming players and is tens of millions of subscribers ahead of its legacy competitors.

Disney has 205 million total subscribers across its streaming services, compared to leader Netflix’s 220.67 million subscribers. HBO and HBO Max have 76.8 million subscribers, Paramount has 62 million across its platforms, and Peacock has 28 million monthly active accounts.

“I think all of the major streaming services have now launched, right?” Landgraf said. “I think that process is complete. So in other words, I don’t see new, major purveyors of programming entering the scene as they have been, continuously, over the past decade or more. As a matter of fact, there are some prior purveyors of television programming that are kind of exiting the scene. So in other words, you’re at the point now where you’re not really adding suppliers, though you are, to some extent, subtracting suppliers.”

Streamers have started to cool off from earlier content-spending frenzies. Netflix is instituting belt-tightening after two consecutive quarters of subscriber losses. And Warner Bros. Discovery CEO David Zaslav says he’s unwilling to overspend just to amass more subscribers.

Landgraf, who previously oversaw FX Networks, now finds himself shepherding original programming under the FX brand, content that premieres either on FX, FXX, or Hulu. “The FX original programming initiative has made a successful transition from primarily feeding linear cable channels to reconstituting itself as a multi-platform brand whose comprehensive streaming home in the U.S. is Hulu,” he said.

Time will tell if Landgraf finally got his Peak TV prediction correct. “It will take a year-and-a-half to find out if I’m right this time or I’ll have to eat crow yet again,” he said.

Tony Maglio contributed reporting.

Sign Up: Stay on top of the latest breaking film and TV news! Sign up for our Email Newsletters here.

One of the most frequent jokes that isn’t really a joke is that when it comes to various Hollywood movie and TV awards, industry folks like to vote for people they’ve worked with before.

Were that true, the legendarily interconnected Kevin Bacon would have all of the trophies. But among the nominations for the 74th Primetime Emmy Awards, the acting fields are dominated by deep ensemble casts and, at the same time, other big ensembles feel like the biggest victims of these category-clogging juggernauts.

In our 500-plus show universe, in which six- to eight-episode limited series are in vogue and even most broadcast shows no longer produce 22 (or more) episodes per season, a star can be top-of-the-call-sheet on one project and a day player on another in the same year, giving some lucky shows five or 10 supporting performances from actors who, in a different era, wouldn’t have had the time or contractual availability for more than one television role.

Instead of capturing the landscape’s full range, Emmy voters opted to honor the widest possible number of actors from the smallest possible number of shows. On the comedy side, that means seven performance nominees from Ted Lasso and four for Abbott Elementary. On the drama side, Succession received two lead, five supporting and seven guest acting noms, putting it comfortably ahead of the well-represented casts of Squid Game and Severance. The limited/anthology fields are dominated by The White Lotus and Dopesick, which combined account for 13 of 14 supporting performances. The lone outlier? Future trivia answer Seth Rogen for Pam & Tommy.

Imagine being a star from one of these shows who didn’t get a nomination. That would include Brittany O’Grady and Fred Hechinger of The White Lotus, even if I could make the case that they have the most complete arcs in Mike White’s scathing comedy. For Succession, it almost feels like a meta joke that underestimated pieces of the Waystar RoyCo family like Karl (David Rasche), Frank (Peter Friedman) and Connor (Alan Ruck) were overlooked. Ted Lasso, meanwhile, gave a full episode to the late-night London odyssey of Coach Beard, only to see Brendan Hunt get shut out along with fellow 2021 nominee Jeremy Swift, though Toheeb Jimoh earned his placement for Sam’s eventful second season.

But for every ensemble carefully noticed by Emmy voters, there were inevitably a half-dozen ensembles that failed to register.

HBO and HBO Max had much to celebrate on Emmy nomination morning, but it’s hard not to feel like the haul could have been far larger. The Lakers-centric Winning Time boasted a cast led by the highly decorated likes of John C. Reilly, Adrien Brody, Tracy Letts and Sally Field, but despite a much publicized spring launch, its only nomination was for cinematography. Julian Fellowes’ The Gilded Age assembled a cast so loaded with Broadway’s elite that the multiple Tony winners nearly outnumber actors without a single Tony nom, yet its name was called only for production design.

The Staircase was honored for stars Colin Firth and Toni Collette, but not scene stealer Parker Posey, the reliably ethereal Juliette Binoche or a carefully selected array of young actors. Himesh Patel got a nomination for Station Eleven, but that love couldn’t extend to perfectly dual-cast Mackenzie Davis and Matilda Lawler or to the overall series, which was deemed less worthy than Inventing Anna, which saw only a miscategorized Julia Garner — so clearly supporting Anna Chlumsky’s protagonist that the TV Academy should have stepped in — get individual notice.

Amanda Seyfried was the only acting nominee for The Dropout, in which William H. Macy’s exaggerated latex forehead, Naveen Andrews’ unsettling love interest and Laurie Metcalf grouchily discussing Yoda and the presence of Ruck, patron saint of this year’s overlooked ensemble members, were among the snubbed. Apple TV+’s Pachinko found actors capable of speaking as many as three languages and several additional dialects. Nothing. Amazon’s As We See It broke representational barriers with its stars on the autism spectrum. Nothing. See also FX’s Reservation Dogs and its impeccable cast of Indigenous stars. Nothing.

None of the solutions feels exactly right to me. Cap the number of nominees or even submission candidates from any particular show? The number of nominees for Succession, Ted Lasso and The White Lotus is extreme, but they were all worthy. Render previous winners ineligible either the next year or in perpetuity? What if the person who keeps winning every year — say, as a pure hypothetical, Julia Louis-Dreyfus — actually deserves to win every year? Or do we just expand the number of nominees in each acting field? That’s probably the easiest recourse. If TV is where the most desirable work is, the Emmys should be honoring, not punishing, that embarrassment of riches.

This story first appeared in the July 27 issue of The Hollywood Reporter magazine. Click here to subscribe.