A group of five historians sent a letter to the NY Times asking for corrections to the 1619 Project. The NY Times published the letter but then added a response in which it declined to issue any corrections.
Three of the signatories to the letter had previously criticized the 1619 Project in interviews with the the World Socialist Website. Last month I wrote about their criticisms. James M. McPherson, a Princeton professor who is an expert on the Civil War said of 1619 “I was disturbed by what seemed like a very unbalanced, one-sided account, which lacked context and perspective on the complexity of slavery.” James Oakes, a CUNY professor who has written several books about slavery and anti-slavery said, “These are really dangerous tropes. They’re not only ahistorical, they’re actually anti-historical.” Finally, professor Gordon Wood who is an expert on the Revolutionary War said 1619, “has the authority of the New York Times behind it, and yet it is so wrong in so many ways.”
Here’s a bit of the letter these historians sent the Times [emphasis added]: