NEW YORK — The New York Times is apologizing for the scandal surrounding a “tone-deaf” and “out of touch” article about award-winning TV producer and Scandal mastermind Shonda Rhimes.
Longtime television critic Alessandra Stanley set off a social media firestorm with her not-so friendly piece that said, “When Shonda Rhimes writes her autobiography, it should be called How To Get Away With Being An Angry Black Woman.”
“There was never any intent to offend anyone and I deeply regret that it did,” NY Times culture editor Danielle Mattoon said. "Alessandra used a rhetorical device to begin her essay, and because the piece was so largely positive, we as editors weren’t sensitive enough to the language being used.”
But another NY Times editor, Margaret Sullivan disagrees. "There are some big questions here — about diversity, about editing procedures and about how The Times deals with stories about women and race. They are worth exploring in-depth."
The article pointed to Rhimes' resume as showcasing TV series with a “powerful, intimidating black woman."
And that wasn't the only eyebrow raiser in this controversial article.
Stanley also accuses Rhimes of ignoring beauty standards by casting Viola Davis for the new series, How To Get Away With Murder. She describes the series star as “older, darker skinned, and less classically beautiful” than actresses like Kerry Washington.
Top Hollywood stars and fans are accusing Stanley of racial profiling with the hashtag #lessclassicallybeautiful
Stanley counters her critics missed the point of the piece. She says she was “praising” Shonda Rhimes for pushing back against stereotypes.
But then there are those words -- Angry, Black and Woman. Would she use words like that to describe Kelsey Grammer?
Afterall, he produces shows like Boss and The Game that also puts men in powerful and intimidating roles. So, does this make him an angry white man?
Well, now folks are calling the critic some pretty choice words.