The NY Times has recently come under fire for an article suggesting that Netflix’s acquisition of a Korean drama had something to do with affirmative action.
The article, which has since been quietly amended amidst the backlash, listed a handful of new shows for readers to view at their leisure. It previously stated that the South Korean Drama, “Stranger”, was an “affirmative-action slot” added to Netflix’s roster, as the company must have recognized “the ubiquity and popularity of South Korean dramas“.
After criticism, the snippet was changed completely, but it still didn’t completely redeem itself; it now implies that South Korean dramas are “awkward” and “obvious”.
Netizens were upset at the publication for likening the addition of the KDrama as an affirmative action move.
“This is an affirmative action slot.” WHITE BITCH, YOU ARE AN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION SLOT. NYTimes steady trash.
Also as far as foreign language shows that were released by Netflix, I remember seeing English dubs of German, Brazilian, and Swedish shows about a year ago, yet nobody mentioned “affirmative action” or anything like that.
And it’s bizarre that he says K-dramas are popular, but then says the show is only there as “affirmative action.” Clearly, it’s there because people like Korean shows. It would only be something like affirmative action if it were offered despite nobody wanting it.
The editor, Gilbert Cruz, responded to the backlash.
Hello Chris. I am that editor. I was off today or I would have responded sooner. Calling “Stranger” an affirmative action pick was bad phrasing. For transparency’s sake, letting you know that we are going to change it. Would love to talk more about it after we do that if you like
Join the conversation+