“The New York Times is simply unserious”: Elizabeth Holmes' Times profile sparks backlash online

An exclusive article about Theranos founder Elizabeth Holmes has drawn widespread backlash as scores of people, including prominent personalities, took to Twitter to express their discontent over the story. Many have perceived the article, published in the New York Times by writer Amy Chozick, as a puff piece trying to rehabilitate the convicted fraudster’s tarnished image.

A May 7 article titled “Liz Holmes Wants You to Forget About Elizabeth,” by the New York Times, appears to rebrand disgraced Theranos founder Elizabeth Holmes into a doting mother while she appeals her conviction.

However, not everyone seemed to be buying into the rhetoric. Shortly after the article was published, many took to social media to express their annoyance over the New York Times’ flattering portrayal of the convicted fraudster, with one user commenting:

“The New York Times is simply unserious.”

Elizabeth Holmes was sentenced to 11 years in prison in November 2022 for knowingly defrauding investors while making fraudulent claims about blood testing startup Theranos.

Holmes was directed to begin serving the sentence in April 2023 after she informed the judge that she was pregnant with her second child. However, On April 26, a day before Homes was scheduled to report for prison, the court granted her request for the sentence to be delayed until they ruled on her appeal.

---

Elizabeth Holmes' New York Times story met with swift backlash online

In the new article, writer Amy Chozick details the days spent with Elizabeth Holmes, her husband Billy, their two babies, and their dog at Holmes' quaint rental home in San Diego. The article portrays a reformed "Liz" Holmes who appears to have shed her old persona and traded in her signature black turtleneck and red lipstick for a "bucket hat and sunglasses."

Holmes even appears to have dropped her deep throaty voice and has instead adopted a "soft, slightly low, but totally unremarkable voice." In the article, Holmes, with much help from writer Amy Chozick, tries hard to peddle the rhetoric of a saintly misunderstood figure who now volunteers at r**e crisis centers.

For Instance, in response to Jennifer Lawrence and Amanda Seyfried playing her in movie and TV adaptations of her life, she said:

"They're not playing me. They're playing a character I created."

The article has drawn swift backlash from people on Twitter, including prominent personality Todd Schulte, the president of the pro-immigration lobbying group FWD.us, who wrote:

"Media outlets make choices every day on how they cover people in the criminal justice system. This story, by the numbers: 95 paragraphs(!); 0 uses of the term convict, felon, offender; 1 photo of the family at the beach; 1 subheader with "devoted mother."

Meanwhile, Former CNN host Soledad O'Brien took to Twitter and said:

Others, who highlighted passages from the article, echoed similar statements:

To be fair, Amy Chozick, who freely admitted to being smitten with Elizabeth Holmes, goes on to mention in the article that perhaps she was taken in by the convicted fraudster's charm. Chozick says that the same was also suggested by her editor, who said, "Amy Chozick, you got rolled!"

The article stated:

“I was admittedly swept up in Liz as an authentic and sympathetic person. She’s gentle and charismatic, in a quiet way. My editor laughed at me when I shared these impressions, telling me (and I quote), “Amy Chozick, you got rolled!”

However, despite the misgivings, the New York Times published the article while Holmes awaits a verdict on her appeal.