In the 1970s, the Vietnam War, Watergate and the increasing visibility of various rights movements ushered in a new politically outspoken attitude among stars. Jane Fonda, frequently derided as "Hanoi Jane" by some for her visit to North Vietnam and outspoken opposition to the Vietnam War, was one such Hollywood fixture known for speaking her mind when given the opportunity. On Oscar night in 1972, after thanking the Academy for her lead actress win for "Klute" — itself a political statement — Fonda kept it brief and simply asked viewers to read between the lines by saying, "There's a great deal to say and I'm not going to say it tonight. I would just like to really thank you very much." ||||| The crush of Hollywood awards season has provided ample opportunity for people in the entertainment industry to speak out about current political events, and almost everyone with something to say has taken advantage. Last month, Meryl Streep drew wild applause (and a presidential hate-tweet) after speaking out against Donald Trump at the Golden Globes, and Aaron Sorkin followed suit days ago by issuing his own creative call-to-arms when taking home the Paddy Chayefsky Laurel Award at this year’s Writer’s Guild of America show. 
 
 Both cases were classic Hollywood political speechifying: an acclaimed artist expressing their own deeply held personal views to a largely like-minded, receptive audience. So with the Oscars coming up this weekend, the question isn’t “Will somebody make a political statement?” but “How many people will make political statements?” No matter your personal views, we live in a charged time of outrage and unrest, and for the past 15 years, we’ve grown comfortable with the idea of the Academy Awards as a political platform. (I don’t want to sound too cynical, but last year I suggested to some friends that we should place bets over whether Leonardo DiCaprio would mention climate change if he won for The Revenant. We didn’t; he did.) 
 
 But despite that recent history, politics at the Oscars hasn’t always been so welcome. There was a time where it was subversive, frowned upon, and sometimes even outright divisive. In preparation for Sunday night, let’s take a look back at the long, weird history of politics at the Oscars. 
 
 1973 
 
 The history of the modern political Oscar speech arguably starts here. In 1973, Marlon Brando was nominated for Best Actor for his performance in The Godfather. But Brando famously boycotted the Oscars, and in his place sent Native American activist Sacheen Littlefeather. She refused the award on Brando’s behalf, as a statement against the stereotypical portrayal of Native Americans in film and television, as well as the federal government’s long-standing failure to honor the treaties it had made with Native American nations. 
 
 The crowd reaction provides a fascinating glimpse into how the event was received. Some members of the audience applaud at Littlefeather raising the issues in question; others boo at the notion of somebody actually criticizing the entertainment industry. (The horror!) Ever-worried about public perception, the Academy responded by banning awards recipients from sending proxies to the microphone on their behalf. 
 
 1978 
 
 When it comes to modern Oscar speechifying, the winner is usually giving a shout-out to a well-celebrated cause. Things were little thornier in 1978. Actress Vanessa Redgrave had been dealing with public outcry for The Palestinian, a documentary she produced and narrated, which presented a sympathetic portrayal of the Palestinian Liberation Organization. When she was nominated for Best Supporting Actress for Julia, the Jewish Defense League picketed the Academy Awards as a protest against her work on the documentary. 
 
 Redgrave won the Oscar for Julia, and took the moment to thumb her nose at those who were speaking out against her, referring to the protestors as “a bunch of Zionist hoodlums.” It didn’t go over so well. 
 
 That same year, the realities of a live broadcast allowed for some real-time follow-ups. When iconic author, playwright, and screenwriter Paddy Chayefsky came to the podium to present that evening’s writing awards, he took a moment to respond. “I would like to say — personal opinion, of course — that I am sick and tired of people exploiting the occasion of the Academy Awards for the propagation of their own personal political propaganda.” The applause from the crowd was so intense and immediate that it cut Chayefsky off halfway through his statement. The writer of Network went on to mention Redgrave by name, saying he would like to remind her “that her winning an Academy award is not a pivotal moment in history, does not require a proclamation, and a simple ‘thank you’ would have sufficed.” 
 
 1993 
 
 Chayefsky would have no doubt been unenthused by Richard Gere’s performance 15 years later, when the actor presented the award for Best Art Direction. Rather than diving into the incalculable creative contributions production designers and art directors make to films, he instead mused on how the Oscar broadcast was being seen in China, wondering aloud if leader Deng Xiaoping was watching the broadcast, and condemning the country’s history of human rights violations in China and Tibet. 
 
 That was before Gere told the audience he was hoping for a “miraculous, movie-like” moment, where the Oscar audience could collectively focus and “send truth, love, and a kind of sanity” to Deng Xiaoping, encouraging him to pull his troops out of Tibet. It was a noble sentiment, to be sure, but it’s best just experienced by watching the video above. 
 
 In 1993, presenters really had a lot to say, because the same evening, Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon kicked off their presentation of the Best Editing award by calling attention to 266 Haitians who were being held in Guantanamo Bay, barred from entering the United States because they’d tested positive for HIV. 
 
 “On their behalf, and on behalf of all the people living with HIV in this country,” Sarandon said, “we would like to ask our governing officials in Washington to admit that HIV is not a crime, and to admit these people into the United States.” The audience applauded, but Oscar telecast producer Gil Cates was not pleased. The Los Angeles Times reported at the time that he was furious, drawing a line between winners discussing their beliefs, and what Gere, Robbins, and Sarandon had done. “Someone who I invite to present an award to use that time to postulate a personal political belief I think is not only outrageous, it's distasteful and dishonest," he said. Later, he banned all three from presenting at the Oscars in the future, though they’ve since been back. 
 
 2002 
 
 Perhaps not coincidentally, political speeches became the domain of winners once again. In 2002, Halle Berry became the first woman of color to win a Best Actress Oscar, and while she highlighted the historic and political significance of the moment, her speech is best remembered for its raw emotion. After taking the stage, Berry was so overwhelmed, she struggled to stay composed, finally collecting her thoughts enough to dedicate the award to groundbreaking women like Dorothy Dandridge, Lena Horne, and Diahann Carroll. 
 
 “I am so honored, and I thank the Academy for choosing me to be the vessel from which this blessing might flow,” she said, while pretty much everybody in the audience clapped or cried. 
 
 2003 
 
 Perhaps the best template for the kind of platform use many are expecting this Sunday is a speech by somebody who was actually booed back in 2003: Michael Moore. When the filmmaker’s documentary Bowling For Columbine won, it was just days after the United States had commenced its invasion of Iraq, and Moore — a vocal critic of then-President George W. Bush — wasted no time getting to what was on his mind. 
 
 “We live in fictitious times,” he said, “We live in a time where we have fictitious election results, that elects a fictitious president.” That’s when the booing and heckling started, and it’s important to remember why. It was three years after the contentious Bush v. Gore case had decided the outcome of the 2000 US presidential election, and the nation had undergone tremendous trauma — followed by rallying together — after the 9/11 attacks. Moore, however, was undeterred in his criticism, saying, “We live in a time where we have a man sending us to war for fictitious reasons.” 
 
 Knowing how the whole mess turned out, and how right Moore actually was, it’s remarkable how outraged the Hollywood elite seemed to be. The irony of it all is that the exact same speech could be repeated today, and not only would it fit the times — it would receive thunderous applause. 
 
 2009 
 
 Barack Obama won the 2008 presidential election, but it was a complicated victory for progressives and the LGBTQ community in California, as that same year, a statewide measure called Prop 8 passed, banning marriage between gay and lesbian couples. So when screenwriter Dustin Lance Black won the Best Original Screenplay award for Milk the following February, the issues he spoke to were intensely personal, and the wounds fresh. 
 
 Black cited Harvey Milk’s story as one that gave him hope when he was a teenager, letting him believe he would one day be able to live openly as who he truly was — and even get married. If Milk had not been killed, Black said, “I think he’d want me to say to all of the gay and lesbian kids out there tonight, who have been told they are less-than by their churches, or by their government, or by their families, that you are beautiful, wonderful creatures of value. And that no matter what anyone tells you, God does love you, and that very soon, I promise you, you will have equal rights federally across this great nation of ours.” 
 
 2013 
 
 This may not count as a political speech, but it was certainly a political moment: a surprise appearance from first lady Michelle Obama to name the Best Picture winner. (It was Argo.) There was no touting of recent achievements, or references to President Obama’s re-election the previous year; it was just a celebration of the films of the year, and the power storytelling has to move us. 
 
 The first lady highlighted how films and art show us nearly anything is possible, as long as we fight for what we believe in. That sounds like a human issue, not a partisan one, but it certainly didn’t stop some conservative outlets from complaining the appearance had somehow ruined the Oscars by introducing politics into the mix. 
 
 Apparently the people behind those hot takes just hadn’t watched the Oscars since 1973. It happens. 
 
 2015 
 
 The political resonance of Ava DuVernay’s Selma was obvious when the film was released in 2014, and when John Legend and Common won Best Song for the film the following year, they turned the victory into a celebration of inclusion and diversity in every possible form. “Recently John and I got to go to Selma and perform ‘Glory’ on the same bridge that Dr. King and the people of the civil rights movement marched on 50 years ago,” Common said. “This bridge was once a landmark of a divided nation. Now it’s a symbol of change. The spirit of this bridge transcends race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, and social status.” 
 
 Legend added a stirring call to action. “We wrote this song for a film that was based on events that were 50 years ago,” he said, “but we say that Selma is now, because the struggle for justice is right now. We know that the Voting Rights Act that they fought for 50 years ago is being compromised right now.” 
 
 Along with the duo’s performance of “Glory,” the speech was one of the emotional highlights of the evening, and a reminder that for all of the derision aimed at celebrities talking politics, sometimes they are able to speak out in a way that truly resonates. 
 
 The same year, Patricia Arquette’s comments — delivered after winning Best Supporting Actress in Boyhood — touched on another simmering issue. After running through the traditional list of Hollywood thank yous, Arquette forcefully spoke out in favor of wage equality and equal rights for women. 
 
 “To every woman that gave birth, to every taxpayer in this nation, [women] have fought for everybody else’s equal rights,” Arquette said. “It’s our time to have wage equality, once and for all, and equal rights for women in the United States of America.” Arquette went on to elaborate backstage, but eventually drew criticism by remarking that it was time for “all the gay people and all the people of color that we've fought for to fight for us now.” 
 
 2016 
 
 Forget Spotlight, The Revenant, or Room: 2016 was the year of #OscarsSoWhite. Outrage erupted after the nominations were announced without a single non-white actor on the list, in spite of heralded turns from Michael B. Jordan (Creed), Will Smith (Concussion), O'Shea Jackson Jr. (Straight Outta Compton), and a host of other films. The fact that Ava DuVernay had been left off the Best Director list the previous year, even though Selma received a Best Picture nomination, only made the situation worse, and high-profile celebrities vowed to boycott the ceremony. 
 
 Thankfully, outrage spurred some action, with The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences finally taking steps to improve diversity in its ranks. (Why it took them so long, considering they’d faced a similar situation 45 years ago, never really got answered.) But it teed up Oscar host Chris Rock to address the scenario head-on in his opening monologue. 
 
 Remember that whole Leonardo DiCaprio / climate change bet I mentioned earlier? He didn’t disappoint. 
 
 Does any of this even matter? 
 
 It’s one thing to look at these speeches as discrete events, moments when rich, famous people used a fancy awards show to talk about whatever was on their minds. Through that lens, a viewer’s reaction is based largely on whatever their own political beliefs are. If an actor is speaking out about something they agree with, that actor should be celebrated. If not, it’s an eye-rolling example of a millionaire telling people what life is really all about. 
 
 What I didn’t realize when I started putting this piece together, however, was the value of the political Oscar speech as a cultural document. Celebrities do live in the same world as the rest of us, and they’ve got the largest microphones possible. So the causes and concerns they express do tend to be the ones simmering across our collective cultural consciousness in any given moment. That turns the timeline above into something actually instructive. It’s a window into the concerns of a given year or decade; a guide to the issues of that moment. 
 
 It’s impossible to look at the above speeches and not see American angst over the war in Iraq, or the dedication to diversity and inclusion that was such a hallmark of the Obama presidency. It’s also easy to spot early hints of the cultural backlash that resulted in the 2016 election: Dustin Lance Black’s tear-tinged reaction to the thought of getting married, something California voters had denied him, or John Legend’s references to America’s continuing struggle with systemic racism. It adds a layer of context and sadness to the way the issues evolved, particularly when anticipating what will no doubt be defiant, principled stands this Sunday in support of immigration, diversity, and voting rights. 
 
 Ultimately, the Oscars are theater, and self-serving theater at that. But viewed in hindsight, the actual human beings at the Oscars give us a sense of where we were politically in a given year — and where we’ll be going from here. ||||| If you were looking forward to a new category of Oscar bests — best presidential Oscar tweets — sadly, President Trump will not be watching the Academy Awards this year. 
 
 A pity, because the tweeter-in-chief had a lot to say about past years' shows. 
 
 He even offered to serve as host of the ceremony more than once. 
 
 In 2015, the now-President declared in an Instagram video that he would be the perfect host for the 2016 affair, noting that the Oscars were "terrible" under the helm of host Neil Patrick Harris. 
 
 Jimmy Kimmel says Oscars monologue will depend on President Trump 
 
 "I should host the #Oscars to shake things up — this is not good!" he wrote in 2014, when Ellen DeGeneres hosted the ceremony. 
 
 By 2016, Trump had already declared his run for president, which unfortunately made his Oscar hosting dream take a backseat. 
 
 While White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said this week that the Trumps would likely be too busy at the Governor's Ball on Sunday night to watch the event — there's still hope he'll give us an update the following day. 
 
 After all, he did wait hours before giving a calculated response on Meryl Streep's powerful political statement at the Golden Globes, calling her a "Hillary lover." 
 
 SAG Awards: Stars slam Trump as surprise winners dominate show 
 
 Director Alejandro Inarritu accepts an Oscar at the 87th Academy Awards in 2015. (MIKE BLAKE/REUTERS) 
 
 Trump wrote on Twitter the next morning, "Meryl Streep, one of the most over-rated actresses in Hollywood, doesn't know me but attacked last night at the Golden Globes." 
 
 Here's a list of our favorite retroactively presidential Oscar tweets: 
 
 2015 Oscars 
 
 "The Oscars are a sad joke, very much like our President. So many things are wrong!" 
 
 "What ever happened to the good old days of The Academy Awards. This show is an insult to the past, just plain bad!" 
 
 Six fantastic things that should happen on Oscar night 
 
 "Put the glamour, beauty & mystery back in the Oscars and the ratings will zoom. Also, & most importantly, the Oscars need credibility." 
 
 "The Oscars were a great night for Mexico & why not-they are ripping off the US more than almost any other nation," he wrote, after director Alejandro Iñárritu's "Birdman" won best picture. 
 
 2014 OSCARS 
 
 He retweeted someone who wrote, "Only 1 solution for the Oscars, Trump as host." 
 
 Actress Meryl Streep gave an impassioned speech about politics during the 2017 Golden Globes. (HANDOUT/REUTERS) 
 
 "Which is worse and which is more dishonest — the #Oscars or the Emmys?" 
 
 Donald Trump says Meryl Streep 'over-rated' in Twitter rant 
 
 "Was President Obama in charge of this years Academy Awards — they remind me of the ObamaCare website! #Oscars." 
 
 "I'm having a real hard time watching the Academy Awards (so far). The last song was terrible! Kim should sue her plastic surgeon! #Oscars," he wrote, referring to Kim Novak. 
 
 2013 Oscars 
 
 In 2013, Trump kicked off his Oscar tweeting spree, noting it was requested "by popular demand." 
 
 "I will be tweeting on the very tainted Academy Awards tonight!" 
 
 "Django Unchained is the most racist movie I have ever seen, it sucked!" 
 
 "Lincoln never sounded like that!" 
 
 Trump to host #Oscars? #TrumpVlog A post shared by Donald J. Trump (@realdonaldtrump) on Feb 23, 2015 at 8:10am PST 
 
 "The Oscar broadcast is really boring — where is the glamour and beauty?" 
 
 "I don't like the opening even a little bit!" 
 
 He even had a few positive things to say: 
 
 "Anne Hathaway is a good winner!" and "Jane Fonda and Michael Douglas look great!" he wrote, before signing off. 
 
 "I've had enough of this — good night!" 
 
 Us, too. ||||| How do you make peace with this? 
 
 It’s not even really about the work — it’s the anxiety leading up to the event itself, and the general malaise that I put my family through. I said to my wife this morning, “What if, to save time, instead of using the word ‘categories,’ we just called them ‘cats’?” And she pointed out that I would waste more time just explaining that. 
 
 Given recent award shows and the general tenor of the moment, are you expecting a lot of political speeches? Is there a point where that becomes too much? 
 
 Newsletter Sign Up Continue reading the main story Get expert TV and movie recommendations from the Watching newsletter The best of what to watch and where to watch it, delivered to your inbox twice a week. Please verify you're not a robot by clicking the box. Invalid email address. Please re-enter. You must select a newsletter to subscribe to. Sign Up You agree to receive occasional updates and special offers for The New York Times's products and services. Thank you for subscribing. An error has occurred. Please try again later. View all New York Times newsletters. 
 
 There definitely is a point at which that becomes too much. There’s also a point at which it becomes too little. And finding that balance is, for me, the most difficult hurdle, when it comes to this broadcast. We don’t know what our mood in this country is going to be on Sunday. We seem to be in a very temperamental period. We’re having wild mood swings as a nation right now. Hopefully everyone will be in a good mood that night. 
 
 Given that Donald J. Trump won the presidency and the Patriots won the Super Bowl, does that ensure that “La La Land” will win best picture? 
 
 I don’t know if they go hand-in-hand. But my plan is, I’m going to tank the first half of the Oscars. And then lead a furious comeback in the second four hours. 
 
 Do you also see this as an opportunity to promote your ABC show? 
 
 Well, let’s be honest: There’s a good chunk of America that doesn’t know that Jimmy Fallon and I are different people. So I’m not going to go into this presuming that they know me and all my bits. You need to approach this without any ego. If there’s too much inside stuff, it won’t work. 
 
 Photo 
 
 So we shouldn’t expect to see Guillermo in any Oscars bits? 
 
 I think that would be confusing to a lot of people. He’ll be working anyway — out on the red carpet, corralling people. People are shocked to hear that we have a show the next night and all week after that. It’s not like we can relax after it — we’ve got to get right back on the pony. There’s no point, really, to doing this if you don’t carry that momentum into your nightly show. 
 
 In recent weeks, Stephen Colbert’s “Late Show” has been drawing more viewers than Jimmy Fallon’s “Tonight Show.” Do you think it’s a sign that audiences want more pointed topical comedy? 
 
 Advertisement Continue reading the main story 
 
 This is all fake news. [Laughs] I mean, that’s a very simple way of looking at the ratings. People seem to forget how important your lead-in is, too. When “The Voice” comes back, so will the ratings of “The Tonight Show.” We’re all pretty lucky right now — all the late-night shows — that more people are watching and reacting. I think everyone loves to have a story line, and people get excited if the tide is turning. But any mathematician would bang you over the head with his calculator. 
 
 There’s a category of late-night hosts — Mr. Colbert, Seth Meyers, Samantha Bee, John Oliver, Trevor Noah — who seem to own the political-comedy beat. Do you worry about being left out of this group? 
 
 It doesn’t worry me. I think it’s wrong. If anything, my concern is, do we do too much Trump stuff on the show? My monologue is at least 50 percent Donald Trump, and it’s not all light commentary. My focus is to comment on what people are talking about. It just so happens that this is what people are talking about. Right now, you go to dinner, and everyone wants to talk about Donald Trump the whole time. Love ’em or hate ’em, he is Topic No. 1, 2 and 4. 
 
 Would you want to host this year’s White House Correspondents’ Association dinner? 
 
 If it seemed like it was going to be very uncomfortable, I would consider it. I’m attracted to that kind of situation. But I don’t know that it would be worth all the blowback. I did it once — it went well. Why put myself through that nightmare again? My dream is to be only saddled with doing [the talk show]. That would be just fine with me. ||||| Image copyright Alamy Image caption Donald and Melania Trump at the Oscars in more harmonious times (otherwise known as 2011) 
 
 When the Oscars comes around on Sunday, there may be so many anti-Trump speeches they may need an award for the best one. 
 
 This year, perhaps more than ever, the ceremony will be about who says what as much as who wins what and who wears what. 
 
 Five weeks on from President Trump's inauguration, with the nation divided over the US president and his policies, many Hollywood stars will feel the need to take a stand on the biggest stage of all. 
 
 Meryl Streep got the ball rolling at the Golden Globes seven weeks ago. That made her even more of a hero in Hollywood, pretty much secured her an Oscar nomination and gave other actors licence to speak out too. 
 
 It's likely that most of those who want to make a point won't mention Mr Trump by name, but will instead make thinly veiled references to him by talking about tolerance and inclusion. 
 
 But Hollywood has a dilemma. The country is split, and Trump supporters already see celebrities - most of whom lined up behind Hillary Clinton - as an out-of-touch elite. 
 
 In a recent Hollywood Reporter poll, two thirds of Trump supporters said they had switched off an awards show when the winners got political. 
 
 Will making big political or moral pronouncements from the podium change anybody's minds? Or will they just make them turn off? 
 
 Who could speak out at the Oscars? 
 
 Image copyright HFPA/EPA 
 
 Meryl Streep (again) 
 
 If she could, she surely would. But she's the outsider to win best actress for Florence Foster Jenkins. 
 
 The favourite is La La Land's Emma Stone, who said in November that Trump's election was a "chance for us to all unite and do the very, very best we can to speak out and be brave." 
 
 Stone has shied away from speaking out much since, mostly limiting herself to saying how "the positive gift of creativity" can transcend borders in divisive times. 
 
 Also in contention is Natalie Portman, who has also made her opposition clear. 
 
 If she wins, perhaps she will repeat a speech she gave to a Women's March in January, in which she thanked Mr Trump for starting "the revolution". 
 
 This was a reference to the fact he has galvanised a new movement demanding greater respect and opportunities for women. 
 
 Image copyright Getty Images 
 
 Mahershala Ali 
 
 The Moonlight star and best supporting actor-elect delivered a powerful speech at the Screen Actors Guild Awards recently, first explaining how his film demonstrates what can happen when people are persecuted. 
 
 Against the backdrop of Trump's travel ban, he went on to reveal that he converted to Islam 17 years ago and that his mother is a Christian minister - but that they put aside the differences in their beliefs, which are "not that important". 
 
 Fellow nominee Dev Patel has said flying into the US in the midst of the travel ban uproar felt like "entering into a nightmare". Jeff Bridges has been more sanguine than most, urging Americans to "work together to make the most beautiful existence that we can". 
 
 He's certainly more sanguine than Michael Shannon, a surprise nominee for Tom Ford's Nocturnal Animals. 
 
 Some think Oscar voters picked him partly because of his vitriolic statements about the President - like he "is going to destroy civilisation as we know it, and the earth", and that "if you're voting for Trump, it's time for the urn." 
 
 Image copyright Viola Davis 
 
 Viola Davis 
 
 Davis, who presented Meryl Streep with her honorary award at the Golden Globes, is going to win the best supporting actress Oscar - if you believe the pundits. 
 
 It would be no surprise if the Fences star sends a strong message from the stage, although it may not be directly directed at Donald Trump. Backstage at the Globes, she said the identity crisis facing America was "bigger than him". 
 
 Talking about "the true meaning of what it means to pursue the American dream", she said: "I think that we've fallen short a lot because there is no way that we can have anyone in office that is not an extension of our own belief system. So then what does that say about us?" 
 
 Image copyright Getty Images 
 
 Casey Affleck 
 
 Speaking at the Bafta Film Awards earlier this month, the best actor contender said he had spoken to Streep and praised her for her speech. 
 
 "I told her how much her speech at the Golden Globes meant to all of us and how grateful I was that she did it and kicked in the door a little bit." 
 
 The speech, he went on, "said it's okay to talk about these things and said it doesn't matter if we are actors, we have been given a microphone and we can speak out." 
 
 His main challenger for the best actor award, Denzel Washington, was the victim of "fake news" when it was reported he was supporting Mr Trump during the election campaign. 
 
 He denied it - though the experience seems to have made him more angry with the media for recycling such stories than with Trump himself. 
 
 Image copyright Reuters 
 
 Jimmy Kimmel 
 
 It is the Oscar host's duty to deliver an opening monologue that gently mocks the assembled glitterati while making humorous references to topical events. So expect there to be a lot of Trump in the opening address by Kimmel. 
 
 Like every other talk show host, Kimmel has had a field day aiming barbs at Mr Trump on his nightly ABC programme. 
 
 Image copyright PA 
 
 Not Asghar Farhadi 
 
 The Iranian director's A Separation won the best foreign film Oscar in 2012, and he is nominated again this time for The Salesman. 
 
 But he has said he will boycott the ceremony in protest at Mr Trump's attempt to ban travel from Iran and six other countries - even if he is able to attend. 
 
 Explaining his decision in a statement, he drew a parallel between "hard-liners" in the US and Iran who both frame the world through an "us and them" mentality. 
 
 Voters could well make a point by giving his film the statuette - and it's likely you'll hear his name mentioned from the podium by other winners. 
 
 Nobody - but that music is jolly nice 
 
 Aside from the prospect of alienating half the country, there's another reason the winners may not get political. They only have 45 seconds each to deliver their speeches before the orchestra strikes up and drowns them out. 
 
 That's barely enough time to thank your mom, dad, agent, all the other wonderful nominees who are much more deserving of this award and God - never mind make a profound political point that is going to heal the nation. 
 
 Follow us on Facebook, on Twitter @BBCNewsEnts, or on Instagram at bbcnewsents. If you have a story suggestion email entertainment.news@bbc.co.uk.
– This year's Golden Globes ceremony turned out to be quite the political affair, and Sunday's Oscars will likely be no different, especially with Donald Trump critic Meryl Streep in attendance. Here's what to expect: Will host Jimmy Kimmel mention Trump? It's a safe bet. He tells the New York Times he likes to talk about "what people are talking about," and Trump "is Topic No. 1, 2 and 4" at the dinner table. Stars appearing on stage are likely to reference Trump, too, reports the BBC. It lists Streep as one of several celebrities that might make a political statement. Mahershala Ali and Casey Affleck are two others. Should they use their time on stage to talk politics, they certainly won't be the first. The Verge looks at the historical role of politics at the Oscars, but notes that while a political speech is generally accepted today, it wasn't always that way. The Los Angeles Times likewise identifies the 11 "most notable political moments" at the Oscars, including the time in 1993 that Richard Gere opted to discuss China. The list gives the impression that such moments are becoming more frequent. But no matter what happens at this year's ceremony, there's a good chance Trump won't like what he sees. He tweeted frequently about previous shows, and the New York Daily News rounds up some of his slams, including: "I should host the #Oscars to shake things up—this is not good!" in 2014, when Ellen DeGeneres was hosting.