The New Yorker magazine struck the word “uppity” from a description of Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) in a recent article about the presidential candidate, Washington Post media critic Erik Wemple reported Wednesday.
The Monday article, titled “Can You ‘Imagine’ Ted Cruz as President?” originally described Cruz as an “uppity loudmouth” who helped to bring about a government shutdown, according to Wemple.
That line now refers to Cruz merely as a “loudmouth.”
Contributor John Cassidy, who wrote the piece, appended an explanation at the bottom of the story:
In describing Senator Cruz’s aggressive actions during his first year in the Senate, I originally used the word “uppity,” which means, according to Webster’s, “acting as if you are more important than you really are, do not have to do what you are told to do, etc.” However, the word also has some disturbing historical connotations that I overlooked, and in applying it to a Latino politician, I goofed. If I gave any offense, however inadvertently, I am sorry.
I’m sure that they will continue to refer to Obama as ‘uppity’, though.
“Disturbed loudmouth” on the other hand has no bad racial connotations, but conveys an apt description, he should have said.
I’m guessing you’re not really familiar with the publication?
They could use “d**kwad” or “dbagger” or “aggressively ignorant” as just one of many possible replacements.
Wait… that’s a real, actual apology. How refreshing. Could someone forward that to FOX News so they can see how it’s done?