Update: The New York Times‘ public editor Margaret Sullivan has added an update to her original post about the paper’s apology:

Early Monday afternoon, I spoke to the culture editor, Danielle Mattoon. She told me that arts and culture editors are well aware of the response to the piece, and she offered words of regret, as well as an explanation and a resolution for the future. ” There was never any intent to offend anyone and I deeply regret that it did,” Ms. 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.” Ms. Mattoon called the article “a serious piece of criticism,” adding, “I do think there were interesting and important ideas raised that are being swamped” by the protests. She told me that multiple editors — at least three — read the article in advance but that none of them raised any objections or questioned the elements of the article that have been criticized. “This is a signal to me that we have to constantly remind ourselves as editors of our blind spots, what we don’t know, and of how readers may react.”

Original post:

Like any good scandal, this is the part where the offending party apologizes — profusely.

Cue The New York Times‘ mea culpa for its article that reduced TV visionary Shonda Rhimes to an “angry black woman.”

People railed and raged against the article — written by TV critic Alessandra Stanley — calling it racist and offensive. The NYT agrees that it was a wrongheaded piece of journalism and that they’re sorry.

The paper’s public editor Margaret Sullivan issued the official word:

Click here to continue reading.

SOURCE: USA Today Entertain This! – Arienne Thompson