Just a month after labeling Mike Brown “no angel,” the New York Times (NYT) continues to offend the Black community.

Twitter exploded after Chief TV Critic for the New York Times Alessandra Stanley attempted to review the newest series added to the ABC lineup “How to Get Away With Murder” starring Viola Davis.

In her article “Wrought in Their Creator’s Image,” Stanley labeled Rhimes and her characters as the “angry Black woman.”

In the first paragraph of her piece Stanley writes:

When Shonda Rhimes writes her autobiography, it should be called “How to Get Away With Being an Angry Black Woman.”

On Thursday, Ms. Rhimes will introduce “How to Get Away With Murder,” yet another network series from her production company to showcase a powerful, intimidating black woman.

Well it took Black Twitter and “Scandal” fans no time to counterattack:

Screen shot 2014-09-19 at 2.12.41 PM

Screen shot 2014-09-19 at 2.12.53 PM

Screen shot 2014-09-19 at 2.13.16 PM

Screen shot 2014-09-19 at 2.09.00 PM

Screen shot 2014-09-19 at 2.09.07 PM

Screen shot 2014-09-19 at 2.09.20 PM

Screen shot 2014-09-19 at 2.11.09 PM

Screen shot 2014-09-19 at 2.11.32 PM

Screen shot 2014-09-19 at 2.11.42 PM

Screen shot 2014-09-19 at 2.12.30 PM


Even Shonda Rhimes slammed Stanley.

While I am insulted, I am not surprised. It is evident the NYT would prefer to feed into the negative stereotypes of the Black community rather than making an educated assessment of a slew of talented writers and actresses who are diversifying primetime television.

Stanley had the nerve to defend her statements. In an email to Talking Points Memo (TPM), she stated she doesn’t think the opening sentence is insulting. While Stanley was birthed with the privilege of being allowed to express herself, Black women were not. It’s no surprise she wants us —as always with any critic or racist remark—to look past the negative and only see the positive.

“The whole point of the piece – once you read past the first 140 characters – is to praise Shonda Rhimes for pushing back so successfully on a tiresome but insidious stereotype,” she told TPM.

I do have one question NYT: Isn’t there a chain of commandment an article has to go through to be approved? Where is the Managing Editor Dean Baquet, a Black man?

Tags: , , ,
Like Us On Facebook Follow Us On Twitter
  • Jessica

    White professional women understand that there is an unwritten rule in American media that demands that no black woman be presented in such a manner that she truly competes with white women in the arenas of beauty, glamour,value, intellect, nor attractiveness to men, both black and white.

    White feminists have been angry with black women ever since black women refused to be used by, nor take leadership from “feminists” in the early days of the women’s movement, who wanted use black women’s state as “true victim” to validate the white feminist quest for white male power.

    When black women responded to feminism with “Africana womanism”, they launched a low-key campaign to indict all black women who refused to come under their umbrella. Of course their were black women who became their pets; they rewarded their black cohorts with fame and influential positions, but the rank-in-file black woman refused to be led by those outside of African American culture.

    It was white feminist who utilized the term “angry black woman.” It was a way to undermine the credibility of those black women they couldn’t manipulate, buy-off or control. If a person is basically angry, that person is considered to be incapable of rational thought. Therefore, whatever an “angry black woman” has to say should be disregarded. And whatever complaint a black woman lodges stems from her angry delusional state, and is therefore invalid.

    There’s a whole slew of black women who agreed to promote the feminist agenda in exchange for fame and money. Many of them you celebrate as “black women leaders.”

    Labels have power. It is our right to define who we are to the world. We must demand to confront inappropriate labels attached to our world image. We must demand that black men, white men and white women discontinue the use of this “the angry black woman; or “an angry black woman.” We must fight against every diminishing offense launched against African American women’s image in the public square.

  • Keepingitreal

    It’s disgraceful that such a race baiting and stereotyping article would be published. NYT would never allow that amount of shade to be leveled at Jews or gays. Darker-skinned, Angry black woman, how “journalistic” New York Times.

  • Anthony

    I am sure I am repeating what others have said, but none of the black women characters I have seen in Shonda Rhimes shows come off as angry to me. The adjectives I would chose are intelligent, assertive, often embattled, but not angry.
    Angry is a convenient tag that insecure white drag up when they want to put black people down. I know this is a women’s site, so it is natural that the focus is on slights aimed at black women, but remember this black NYT editor allowed the character assassination of Mike Brown to see the light of day too.