Want to share with your friends too?

Entertainment
06 Dec 2018

US-based publication takes down racist piece on Priyanka

Trashy piece on Priyanka taken down by publication

Priyanka Chopra and Nick Jonas's grand wedding has been breaking headlines across the world.

However, a writer from lifestyle magazine The Cut didn't seem happy about it.

In her article yesterday, she called Priyanka a "modern-day scam artist" and that Nick was married into a "fraudulent relationship".

But, after receiving massive backlash, the magazine took down the article and apologized for it.

Here's what went down.

In context

Trashy piece on Priyanka taken down by publication
Article advised Nick to 'gallop away' on a horse

Content

Article advised Nick to 'gallop away' on a horse

Yesterday, Mariah Smith from The Cut wrote an article titled Is Priyanka Chopra and Nick Jonas's love for real?.

In her article, Smith called Priyanka a "global scam artist" and maintained that Nick married into a fraudulent relationship against his own will.

She also had an advice: "Nick, if you're reading this, find that horse and gallop away as fast as you can!"

Disparaging words

Smith didn't feel Priyanka has 'it all' to marry Nick

In more than 1,000 words explaining how the duo's relationship is fake, Smith didn't seem to feel Priyanka has "it all" to marry someone who is related to Kevin Jonas.

According to Smith's article, the young and naive Nick was only looking for a fling but was tricked into marriage by Priyanka.

Needless to say, her derogatory article was slammed by many.

Love Entertainment news?

Stay updated with the latest happenings.

Notify Me

The article was sexist, racist and disgusting: Sonam Kapoor

Fairly certain Nick hasn't been kidnapped: Arjun Kapoor

Magazine edits article, removes few words, still not good enough

Edited version

Magazine edits article, removes few words, still not good enough

After receiving heavy criticism towards Smith, the magazine updated her article but still did a poor job.

In the updated version, it removed the epithet "modern day scam artist" in front of Priyanka's name.

It also took down the tasteless advice to Nick to gallop away in a horse.

But even after a few changes, the updated article didn't make the cut.

Apology

Magazine removes article, says 'we're sorry'

Finally, The Cut removed the article and posted an apology saying the post shouldn't have gone up.

The link to the article now reads, "We've received dozens of messages from readers expressing their anger. We want you to know that we hear you and we're sorry. The whole piece missed the mark...We apologize to our readers and to Priyanka and Nick."

About time!

These kinds of random things can't disturb Priyanka's 'happy place'

Priyanka's worth is more than Nick, didn't marry for fame

Self-made woman

Priyanka's worth is more than Nick, didn't marry for fame

Smith's article wasn't only sexist, but also lacked sense.

She didn't realize that Priyanka is an ex-Miss World and a celebrated Bollywood actor and so doesn't need fame or stardom out of this marriage.

Also, Priyanka is worth $3mn more than Nick, so money is also out of question.

Finally, Ms Smith, they are adults and got married because they wanted to.

Disgruntled fan?

Article was clickbaity, suggested Nick was a fool

Smith's crass article was more than just a ranting from a disgruntled fan. It was a clickbait, which failed miserably.

Worse, the article was published by The Cut whose punchline is "Showing the world what women are made of".

They took hypocrisy to another level, seriously!

The article wasn't just derogatory towards Priyanka but it also suggested that Nick was a fool.

How could the article pass through the editor's discerning eyes?

Not okay!

How could the article pass through the editor's discerning eyes?

The article reeked of envy and was worse than a gossipy piece on stars.

The magazine, in its attempt to bring PeeCee down, took sensational journalism to another low.

While the publication may have 'reviewed' and brought down the article (though the URL still remains), the trashy piece should not have passed the editor's discerning eyes in the first place.

Ask NewsBytes
User Image

Next Timeline