Home Videos Photos

Whoopi Goldberg Vs. The New York Times

| Filed under: Celebrity FeudsWhoopi GoldbergHalle Berry

Whoopi Goldberg criticizes New York Times article

Whoopi Goldberg is P-I-S-S-E-D at two film critics for not mentioning her Best Supporting Actress win in a New York Times' article that discusses race in this year's Oscar contenders.

On yesterday's episode of The View, Whoopi explained her sentiments by saying:

“I am embarrassed to tell you it hurt me terribly. I—when you win an Academy Award, that's part of what you've done, your legacy. I will always be Academy Award-winner Whoopi Goldberg[…] This is not hidden information. And to these two critics—who are the head critics of the New York Times—maybe… it's hard not to take it personally."

She even brought out the big guns and placed her golden statue on the talk show's table for everyone to see.

The article written by Manohla Dargis and A. O. Scott mentions the names of the past decade's seven black Oscar winners spanning from Halle Berry's win for the film Monster's Ball to Monique's win last year for her performance in the film Precious.

The article even mentions historic winners Hattie McDaniel and Sidney Poitier, but no Whoopi.

Dargis wrote a slightly dismissive response in an e-mail to the New York Observer, saying:

"Like others, we were surprised and dismayed by the lack of racial diversity in the ten nominees for best picture; but, as we also wrote in our article, all of 2010 was notable for its lack of racial diversity. In order to provide some historical context, we took a look back at the representations of African Americans in American cinema, but our main focus was what has happened in the years since Mr. Washington's and Ms. Berry's historic wins. It's a shame that Ms. Goldberg and her co-hosts opted to concentrate on a perceived slight rather than address a far more urgent issue: the lack of racial diversity in contemporary American cinema."

What do U think?

Should Whoopi be whoopin' some butt or did she "concentrate on a perceived slight" of the article?

[Image via WENN.]

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Celebrities Who USED TO Be Best Friends!
Most Iconic Red Carpet Fashion Moments EVER! The Good, The Bad & The Ugly!
Hottest Movie Sex Scenes Of All Time!
Emmys 2014: Best Dressed
The Most Shocking Celebrity Feuds With Happy Endings!
Super-Duper! Actors Who Have Starred As More Than One Comic Book Character!
Email this  »

41 comments to “Whoopi Goldberg Vs. The New York Times”



  1. 1

    I'm proud of Whoopi for whoopin some ass. The writers deserve it but most of all I was more shocked to hear on the show that Elizabitch canceled her subscription to the Times…



  2. 2

    NOW YOU HAVE TO BE BLACK TO BE NOMINATED!? FUCK OFF!!!



  3. 3

    HA HA HA HA HA HA HA! I hate the NY Times but I hate Whoopi more!



  4. 4

    she needs to get over herself. the author is right.



  5. 5

    Hmmm… there were probably a fair few that weren't mentioned. Like they said, their focus wasn't on getting every single person on there, it was to shed light on racial diversity. That should be commended. She should have focused on the real issue, but she got too pridefull… sigh



  6. 6

    Whoopi was more concerned with her not being mentioned than anything else. She came off just a wee bit egotistical. I thought it came off clear that they were referencing the past ten years, not the entire history of American cinema.



  7. 7

    if no one seems to realize that they were focusing on the wins since Halle-then obviously they didn't write a good article-not only is Whoopi an Oscar winner-she has HOSTED the oscars and has the EGOT!

  8. Blunt says – reply to this


    8

    wtf, umm whoopi was the second female black oscar winner, halle won more than 10yrs later. Smh the NY Times are just moronic journalist like perez, all talk but no facts



  9. 9

    I guess Hattie McDaniel is rolling over in her grave for not being mentioned as a black, female, Academy Award winner as well; and the first! Get over yourself Whoopi.



  10. 10

    I read the article in its entirety; it appeared in last Sunday's NYT. While it's true that Ms. Goldberg's historic win was omitted, I view that as an oversight and not necessarily a slight.
    Do Marisa Tomei and Kathy Bates get mentioned in all reviews about Oscar winning actresses? I think not.
    Calm down, Whoopi.
    And as for Elisabeth H. canceling her subscription to the Times, I doubt she was reading that paper anyway.



  11. 11

    Team Whoopi!



  12. 12

    she's a despicable individual…she has never given anything to NY..nothing to Chelsea where she grew up, no help to the Hudson Guild when they asked.
    She didn't deserve the Oscar she got and now she's complaining…
    F*** her.



  13. 13

    This is not the first time Whoopi's ego has come front and center. You might recall she had a similar hissy fit when she was left out of a video about Oscar hosts. It looks to me like Whoopi left some bad feelings in her wake when she left the Oscars.



  14. 14

    Whoopi read the article incorrectly. Other black Oscar winning actors pre 2002 weren't mentioned either. Whoopi has become so big headed, I guess she thinks she is a full fledged news person on that silly show, that she failed to see the true meaning in the article.



  15. 15

    Whoopi is bad ass and to mention everyone but her is stupid. Team Whoopi.



  16. 16

    Didn't she win an Oscar when she starred in that Predator movie with Arnold?



  17. 17

    I love Whoopi, and I understand her frustration. That said, I do NOT understand the point of the author - why should there HAVE to be a certain number of Academa Award winners who are of a certain ethnicity? Ridiculous.



  18. 18

    First of all-you Perez as usual effed up when wanting to create more drama out of something. You failed (I'm sure on purpose) that they were discussing that there have either been only 7 nominated or 7 Oscar winner's since 2002. Whoopi's Oscar was before 2002. She just made a idiot of herself and her cast.



  19. 19

    I just read the article, and it doesn't say 7 people since 2002, it says 7 people IN THE LAST 73 YEARS. It then goes on to name those 7 people.

    QUOTE: "the Academy, which had given statuettes to a total of seven black actors in the previous 73 years. After Mr. Washington and Ms. Berry, there would be Jamie Foxx and Forest Whitaker (both best actors); Morgan Freeman (best supporting actor); Jennifer Hudson and Mo’Nique (best supporting actresses)."

    Whoopi has the right to be pissed.



  20. 20

    Everyone else ran this yesterday. You're loosing it, Mario.



  21. 21

    I hate to side with the NYTimes, but Whoopi over-reacted. The article wasnt about ALL African American Oscar winners, it was about those nominated since Halle/Denzel. Whoopi wasnt part of that era.



  22. 22

    I think we focus WAY to much one race. Im sorry but this had nothing to do with race and I dont think its necessary to FORCIBLY put race into everything just to prove some faux equality point. The reason race is an issue still is because of crap like this Im america the idea is 1 race one nation but every one wants a crutch to bitch about., why do white people always have to feel shame for shit? Proper history classes would go along way.



  23. 23

    Whoopi is 100% correct.



  24. 24

    Re: tallguy10 – FIGURES… I KNEW SOMETHING WAS UP AND THE NY TIMES WASNT WRONG AFTER ALL. WHOOPI NEEDS HER ASS WHIPPED FOR REALZ.

  25. 7tizz says – reply to this


    25

    She's not black - she's a very dark Jew.



  26. 26

    What an egotistical hag. Whoopi has more nerve than a two-ton gorilla. She should read the NYTimes article from yesterday on Judi Dench — she'll see a woman who is genuinely elegant and not stuck on herself. Whoopi can go fuck herself. And go down on those idiots on "The View" as well (Joy Behar is the only one worth a dime).



  27. 27

    Whoopi had every right to be pissed! She was the only African American woman nominated the year she won and she was the first African American woman to be nominated after Hattie McDaniel like 75 years previous, pretty big deal if you ask me.



  28. 28

    Whoopi definitely needs to get over herself. She is an egomaniac. She acts like she is so important. What has she ever done that is so important? She is an Oprah Winfrey wannabe.



  29. 29

    Big Deal. She is now a talk show host. Her choice. She has become so obnoxious, she has been forgotten as a big screen actress.

  30. Laura says – reply to this


    30

    well, she did win for a movie that had a lot to do with race, would make sense that they should include it in an article about race, or lack there of. they should just cough it up to bad reporting/researching (or just being stupid/not caring), instead of rationalizing it as a blame against whoopi. seriously, be professional.



  31. 31

    What was the point of the artical? Was it intended to be a comprehensive list of black award winners? Where are the Asians? What about the latinos? Folks, don't go looking for racial issues where there isn't one. Sorry but the artical and Whoopie are both idiots looking for a cause to stick their perspective name to. Poor judgement for both.



  32. 32

    THIS BITCH! Shut the FUCK UP WHOOPPI! Just come out the Closet!



  33. 33

    I have to agree with Whoopi about this one. NYT should have just apologized and said they made a mistake, at the least they should have said it was a gross oversight.

    And guys, she said she was "ashamed" to make a big deal about it.



  34. 34

    What was glaryingly and embarrassing obvious the day the nominations were announced was the total lack of anyone of color. As a white person I was disgusted that the sum total of the movie industry is white men and women and most Jewish at that. Hollywood needs a wake-up call. Entertainment should represent all peoples of all colors, creeds, races etc. Maybe if some more diverse movies were made the box office returns might improve. Whoopi get over yourself. You completely missed the point - you of all peopl!



  35. 35

    Dargis is doing their half-assed rendition of deflecting attention away from their shoddy journalistic reporting. They screwed up and they are not fooling anyone but themselves.



  36. 36

    Re: MooMooMario

    It called reading….please do that…….BEFORE making your post.



  37. 37

    There were only 7 people mentioned…there could/should have been an 8th. Sloppy writing…no fact checkers anymore?



  38. 38

    Re: fulana – Exactly. If they were talking about diversity in American cinema than it seems awfully clear that to omit Whoopi IS a slight… Go Whoopi!!



  39. 39

    if i was whoopi i'd be pissed too. it is not the first time the academy "accidently" left her out of something.

  40. Tasos says – reply to this


    40

    Goldberg's offense pertaining to her "legacy" would have justified the bother of her sending a much more dignified and professional personal note to the authors about their oversight.

    Perhaps Goldberg would have received an apology if she resisted addressing the matter on national television, avoided attempting to publicly shame whomever may have erred; you know, exercised a bit of civility or grace about which she has recently preached.

    The truth is, I cannot much empathize with one who used her bully pulpit to shame others to advance her self-interests. Team Decency.



  41. 41

    So now people complain that not getting nominated for an award is racist? You get nominated if your performance is worthy. Not becuase youre black! What a bunch of bitches. Get a grip. If you start awarding people for their color then the award becomes meaningless, just like MTV! and just like the new whiney Gay movement. This planet sucks, people are such whining bitches!