NYT Offensive reviews

[imklepcyk]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 1:53am

NYT just had the smokey Joe's incident and now has the "them " incident. What is up with this?

[msmp]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 1:55am

This could just be a personal thing, but I've found the quality and standards at the Times to be declining for a couple years now. It started with the op-ed pages, then drifted to some of the feature writing, and now is really hitting the arts and critics hard. The news desk has been mostly insulated, but I'm worried that whoever is setting the editorial direction at the Times just doesn't know what their audience wants anymore.

[Bwayfan292]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 2:00am

Some broadway people have already commented on this, but this should blow up tommorow.

[broadwaynerdnewbie]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 9:55am

msmp said: "This could just be a personal thing, but I've found the quality and standards at theTimesto be declining for a couple years now. It started with the op-ed pages, then drifted to some of the feature writing, and now is really hitting the arts and critics hard. The news desk has been mostly insulated, but I'm worried that whoever is setting the editorial direction at theTimes just doesn't know what their audience wants anymore."

I agree, the paper as a whole has been on the decline recently and most reporters find any criticism of themselves baffling and dismissive. It’s a shame really.

[Kad]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 9:56am

Sara Holdren's thoughtful reviews at New York Mag are the best. Even when I don't agree, they are at least illuminating.

[Dancingthrulife2]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 10:08am

Do you realize that you are talking about the same newspaper that drummed up for the Iraq war?

[ScottyDoesn'tKnow2]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 10:24am

Can somebody explain what this is about? I know about the Smokey Joe's Cafe incident, but what about the "them" incident?

[nasty_khakis]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 10:34am

I can 100% see how the "them" joke, referring to Peppermint's character in Head Over Heels (who is nonbianary plural) can be taken as offensive, but, forgive me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the show make a joke about someone saying it too at the end? I remember a few jokes/reactions when the Oracle says this of a "huh? them? she?" nature.

[S394206H]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 10:46am

nasty_khakis said: "I can 100% see how the "them" joke, referring to Peppermint's character in Head Over Heels (who is nonbianary plural) can be taken as offensive, but, forgive me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the show make a joke about someone saying it too at the end? I remember a few jokes/reactions when the Oracle says this of a "huh? them? she?" nature."

The whole tone of the article comes off as snide and condescending, as Brantley clearly dislikes the show and wants to find fault with it. In context, his “them” comment comes off as a deliberate dig at how “liberal and trendy” the show is, something he clearly thinks is overrated and dumb. If he was truly trying to reference a line or joke in the show, he does so in a very tasteless way that does not make sense to people like myself who haven’t seen the show and therefore wouldn’t get the joke. Personal opinions about the meaning behind the line aside, I definitely feel like the editor should have caught how this could be misconstrued, and revisions or changes should have been made to prevent this from happening. Ben Brantley has every right to dislike the show and write a negative review, but there are ways to do that that don’t involve misgendering someone or making fun of a much-discriminated against group of people. 

[IdinaBellFoster]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 10:52am

Brantley has long passed his expiration date. I'd rather Jesse Green be the sole chief theatre critic. 

[TheSassySam]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 11:03am

How long has Brantley worked at the Times? Maybe it's time for retirement. 

[The Distinctive Baritone]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 11:06am

This seems to be the offending passage:

“Pythio identifies as “nonbinary plural.” Dametas (Tom Alan Robbins), the King’s viceroy and father of Mopsa, finds himself strangely drawn to her — I mean them.”

What is non-binary plural? Is it meant to be silly in the show? Someone please clarify.

[Kad]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 11:08am

TheSassySam said: "How long has Brantley worked at the Times? Maybe it's time for retirement."

He started writing reviews for them in 1993 and became the chief critic in 1996.

 

[IdinaBellFoster]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 11:19am

The Distinctive Baritone said: "This seems to be the offending passage:

“Pythio identifies as “nonbinary plural.” Dametas (Tom Alan Robbins), the King’s viceroy and father of Mopsa, finds himself strangely drawn to her — I mean them.”

What is non-binary plural? Is it meant to be silly in the show? Someone please clarify."

I have not seen the show, but non-binary plural is how some people identify their gender. 

[ScottyDoesn'tKnow2]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 11:23am

BWW already has a write-up about people in the community tweeting about the review:

https://www.broadwayworld.com/article/Broadway-Takes-To-Twitter-Over-Transphobic-New-York-Times-Review-For-HEAD-OVER-HEELS-20180727

[haterobics]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 11:35am

[AC126748]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 11:55am

Brantley apologized -- I want to believe sincerely. That's something Laura Collins-Hughes still hasn't done. If anything, she's doubled down. 

[alliez92092]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 12:06pm

I'm honestly not trying to create more problems, but I think it truly speaks volumes of The New York Times that they rushed to put out an apology/statement from Brantley, their chief male theater critic, but have effectively ignored taking any responsibility for Laura Collins-Hughes, the female critic. What LCH wrote was awful, but it seems as if she's thrown under the bus by the Times.

[Tag]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 12:07pm

Just wait for the uproar when they start stunt casting with Scarjo.

[Elegance101]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 12:14pm

alliez92092 said: "I'm honestly not trying to create more problems, but I think it truly speaks volumes of The New York Times that they rushed to put out an apology/statement from Brantley, their chief male theater critic, but have effectively ignored taking any responsibility for Laura Collins-Hughes, the female critic. What LCH wrote was awful, but it seems as if she'sthrown under the bus by the Times."

Maybe she still doesn't believe she said anything wrong? If she wanted to apologize, the NYT would've put out her statement; it's not like she's been begging them to put out her statement and they've turned her down because...they don't like her? She's a woman? I truly doubt she wants to apologize, which makes her situation worse in my eyes.

[SomethingPeculiar]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 12:18pm

alliez92092 said: "I'm honestly not trying to create more problems, but I think it truly speaks volumes of The New York Times that they rushed to put out an apology/statement from Brantley, their chief male theater critic, but have effectively ignored taking any responsibility for Laura Collins-Hughes, the female critic. What LCH wrote was awful, but it seems as if she'sthrown under the bus by the Times."
 

It MIGHT be that Laura Collins-Hughes chose to respond to the controversy herself via Twitter, instead of having the publications and its editors intervene. (And when she did so, the situation was made worse.) Brantley isn't on social media. But his statement is also apologetic, unlike Collins-Hughes's defense of her writing.

[AC126748]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 12:21pm

The NYT isn't throwing Laura under the bus. She could issue an apology if she wanted to. She's chosen to double down and be defensive.

[ScottyDoesn'tKnow2]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 12:31pm

Agreed. LCH chose the way she wanted to respond to it. The NYTimes is actually respecting her by not taking any further action to undermine her position as she sticks to her guns even though it's probably best for them to do so or to strong-arm her (privately) into issuing an apology.

Updated On: 7/27/18 at 12:31 PM

[Elegance101]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 12:35pm

Also, LCH never officially put out any sort of statement, she simply responded to Umphress' friends who were coming for her (rightfully so) on Twitter. She has not said a single thing to Umphress herself, nor has she written a coherent statement other than a sentence or two in a reply.

And Ben Brantley does have a Twitter, but he wanted to respond in an appropriate way. What he said was very wrong, but I'm happy he was quick to apologize and I understand his explanation. I'm hoping it's sincere and he's learned something important about supporting the LGBTQ+ community.

[JudyDenmark]

Posted: 7/27/18 at 12:48pm

Kad said: "Sara Holdren's thoughtful reviews at New York Mag are the best. Even when I don't agree, they are at least illuminating."

I don't think I can read any of her reviews again after she blatantly spoiled The Band's Visit. I'm still salty about it. 

(FWIW, I respect Brantley's apology here. I believe him that he was just trying to echo the tone of the joke in the show, and didn't realize how it would read.)