- Sophie Turner recently responded to an article published by The Cut, an online branch of New York Magazine, which called Priyanka Chopra and Nick Jonas’ relationship “fraudulent.”
- “This is wildly inappropriate and totally disgusting,” Turner, who is engaged to Joe Jonas, wrote on Twitter.
- Other people on Twitter have criticized the article, which appears to be at least slightly satirical, as “too harsh” or “uncalled for.” Some called it racist and sexist.
Sophie Turner recently jumped to her future sister-in-law’s defense after an article published by The Cut suggested that Priyanka Chopra had essentially tricked Nick Jonas into marriage.
“This is wildly inappropriate and totally disgusting,” Turner, who is engaged to Joe Jonas and attended Chopra and Nick Jonas’ wedding this weekend, wrote on Twitter.
https://twitter.com/SophieT/status/1070312563710160897?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
Approximately one hour after Turner’s tweet, the article was removed and replaced with an editor’s note: “Upon further editorial review, we found this story did not meet our standards. We’ve removed it and apologize.”
In its original form, the article (written by freelancer Mariah Smith) was titled, "Is Priyanka Chopra and Nick Jonas' Love for Real?"
While it appeared to be at least slightly satirical, Smith posited that Chopra, who is 10 years older than her husband, had been vetting various candidates for marriage.
Smith wrote that Chopra's professed interest in a lavish lifestyle led her to desire a moneymaking wedding using various sponsorships, including Amazon, Tiffany, Ralph Lauren, and Google Pixel 3.
http://instagr.am/p/Bq6w3vBn_-P
"That's right: Nicholas Jonas married into a fraudulent relationship against his will this past Sunday, December 1, and I'll tell you why I think so," Smith wrote. "All Nick wanted was a possible fling with Hollywood's latest It Woman, but instead he wound up staring straight at a life sentence with a global scam artist."
Both of these lines were deleted in an updated version of the piece. The article was later removed altogether.
Some fellow writers and freelance journalists praised the piece upon publication.
https://twitter.com/mollymulshine/status/1070091736444231681?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
Thank you to @mRiah and @TheCut for reminding me that Priyanka Chopra once told me “I like jewelry that is – well, stones that are big, let’s just say. I work very hard to spoil myself." https://t.co/FebQaU2rrO
— Alex Apatoff Besen (@Nicefunalex) December 4, 2018
Other readers, however, criticized the piece for being "too harsh" or "uncalled for."
https://twitter.com/shutupjaya/status/1070193268246413312?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
This ‘article’ belongs in the bin. Let her live. She’s successful and she owns it, don’t be such a bitter Betty.
— Aisha (@rabbyxB) December 5, 2018
Many pointed out that Chopra is already successful, wealthy, and respected in her own right - and would therefore have no use for a pseudo-marriage.
https://twitter.com/BeeBabs/status/1070164188952256513?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfwhttps://twitter.com/M_Karimjee/status/1070204536516694016?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
Writer and editor Krutika Mallikarjuna wrote that "60% of that piece was based on a lack of understanding of hindu wedding ceremonies and looking at the cultural norms of millions of people as weird and something that needs to be forced on other people."
truly wild to read a story on @TheCut that vilifies a brown foreign woman for coming in here and snatching up all of america's good whites
— discourse wallah (@krutika) December 5, 2018
also the idea that nick jonas has anything to offer to priyanka chopra professionally that she didn't already have when she met him
that's willful ignorance
— discourse wallah (@krutika) December 5, 2018
Writer Scaachi Koul echoed this sentiment, saying "only people who have had a multi-day indian wedding foisted upon them are allowed to complain about the multi-day indian weddings of others."
https://twitter.com/Scaachi/status/1070311468715962368?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfwhttps://twitter.com/Scaachi/status/1070327863264583682?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
Some said the article had racist, sexist, or xenophobic implications.
Totes confused by this piece calling Priyanka Chopra a "global scam artist". Is the problem her lavish living (which tbf is routine celeb behavior/spending) or the fact that it's a brown Indian woman successfully monetizing her life? https://t.co/7FT7FcOzer
— Nishita Jha (@NishSwish) December 5, 2018
https://twitter.com/beejoli/status/1070181860582420480?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfwhttps://twitter.com/beejoli/status/1070181356347387905?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
I'm not a fan of Priyanka Chopra, but that essay by @TheCut reeks of racism and colonial/western elitism. The author @mRiah (who is sadly also a woman of colour!) seems to be a very hateful person who thinks having a home theatre is reason enough to write vile things about her.
— Ruchi Kumar روچی کمار रूची कुमार (@RuchiKumar) December 5, 2018
Smith didn't respond to INSIDER's request for comment, nor did representatives for Turner, Chopra, or Jonas.
A representative for New York Magazine, which is the umbrella publication responsible for The Cut, redirected INSIDER to the editor's note that replaced the article.
Visit INSIDER's homepage for more.