Full Breakdown
Nikole Hannah-Jones Faces Backlash for Tribute to Assata Shakur
1/4/2026, 8:47:30 PM
Controversial Tribute in The New York Times
Nikole Hannah-Jones, a writer for The New York Times and a professor at Howard University, has sparked significant controversy following her tribute to Assata Shakur, a convicted murderer and former member of the Black Liberation Army. In her December 16 column, Hannah-Jones portrayed Shakur as a figure akin to historical freedom fighters like Nat Turner and Harriet Tubman, describing her as someone who "saw herself as an escaped slave" and "died free." This characterization has drawn criticism for its perceived romanticization of Shakur's violent past.
Historical Context of Assata Shakur
Assata Shakur, born JoAnne Deborah Byron, was convicted in 1977 for the murder of New Jersey State Trooper Werner Foerster during a shootout. Shakur's criminal history includes ties to various violent acts, including armed robberies and attacks on law enforcement. In 2005, the FBI designated her a domestic terrorist, and she was placed on the most wanted list in 2013. Following her escape from prison, Shakur sought asylum in Cuba, where she lived until her death earlier this year.
Criticism of Hannah-Jones' Narrative
Critics have accused Hannah-Jones of neglecting the broader implications of Shakur's actions and the impact on her victims. For instance, the tribute fails to mention the name of Foerster, who left behind a widow and a young son. Instead, Hannah-Jones emphasizes Shakur's narrative, suggesting that her escape was akin to a modern "Underground Railroad." This framing has been described as an attempt to rewrite history, with critics arguing that it glosses over Shakur's violent crimes and the suffering of her victims.
Voices of Dissent
Billy Binion, a writer for Reason magazine, criticized the tribute as "offensively bad," asserting that Shakur was not an "escaped slave" but a convicted murderer. He questioned the editorial decision to publish such a piece, highlighting the disparity in how Shakur's legacy is presented compared to the victims of her crimes. Similarly, columnist Ira Stoll pointed out that while the column mentions the racial composition of the jury that convicted Shakur, it omits relevant details about the political context, such as the presidency of Barack Obama during her designation as a terrorist.
Official Responses and Broader Implications
The New York Times has faced scrutiny for its editorial choices, with some arguing that the publication has a pattern of favoring certain narratives while silencing opposing viewpoints. Critics have noted that the paper previously barred columns from figures like Senator Tom Cotton while allowing Hannah-Jones' controversial pieces to be published. This has raised questions about the standards of objectivity and neutrality in journalism, particularly in the context of politically charged topics.
Verbatim Quotes
- “Liberation came with unbearable costs. But Shakur, who saw herself as an escaped slave, died free,” — Nikole Hannah-Jones, Writer, The New York Times
- “This year-end tribute to Assata Shakur by the NYT’s Nikole Hannah-Jones is offensively bad.” — Billy Binion, Writer, Reason magazine
- “As Stoll wrote at the Washington Free Beacon: Hannah-Jones doesn’t come straight out and assert that her subject was innocent, yet she certainly leaves readers with plenty of doubt.” — Ira Stoll, Columnist, Washington Free Beacon
The tribute to Assata Shakur by Nikole Hannah-Jones continues to evoke strong reactions, reflecting ongoing debates about historical narratives, journalism, and the legacy of controversial figures in American history.
