He should have used the term ableist [1] instead of racist, true. Then again, I'm sure you understood what he meant even if he did not use the correct -ist/-phobe/-privilege term of the moment. Also, his question - did this movie get lauded because of being a good movie or because its cast is made up out of people from a certain identity group - is not that far-fetched.

[1] The spell checker in Firefox recognises ableist as a valid word where it would not have done so only a few years back. This is not language evolution, it is revolutionary language.

Greater than one. The academy has put a significant amount of preference on race, so that none of these awards actually represent the movies or the performances, but the racial make up of the cast and crew.

I know difference in hearing ability is not something that constitutes a "race". But I consume a lot of US media I've come to accept that "racism/racist" can be used for anything that describes discrimination against a certain group.

“Racism” is definitely defined as discrimination because of race. It doesn’t matter that the general twitterverse has decided to misuse a term. (don’t get me started on the now constant incorrect use of “calculus” instead of “calculation”)

The word you’re looking for is “bigot/bigotry”.

The ADL changed the definition of the term racism somewhere in 2020 to mean The marginalization of people of color based on a socially constructed racial hierarchy that privileges white people. They changed it to something slightly less inflammatory in the beginning of 2022 but the fact stands that this organisation deemed the time to be ripe to go fully anti-white - i.e. to become racist according to the correct, printed-dictionary interpretation of that term. This is not the Twitterverse, it is (or at least used to be) one of the mainstays in the "fight" for a "more just society".