When the 77th Primetime Emmy Awards aired on September 14, 2025, many viewers expected a slate of tributes during the “In Memoriam” segment to honor television figures who passed away in the past year. Among those missing from the televised portion was Dr. Danielle Spencer, best known for playing Dee Thomas on What’s Happening!!. Actress and philanthropist, Holly Robinson Peete, took to Instagram to express strong disappointment, calling the omission “not just an oversight, it’s an injustice to her legacy.”
Dr. Danielle Spencer was an actress and veterinarian beloved for her role as Dee Thomas in the classic sitcom What’s Happening!!, a character who resonated deeply with audiences for both her humor and her authenticity. Her work broke barriers in its time and continues to be remembered fondly.
“In Memoriam” segments at major television and film awards shows are meant to remember those in the industry who have passed; they serve both as tribute and recognition. Because broadcasts are time-limited, organizers often must choose which names and images appear on air vs. those included in longer online tributes. This year’s Emmy broadcast featured many television icons but omitted several others from the televised montage, including Spencer.
“How could the Emmys forget to mention my friend Dr. Danielle Spencer, our beloved Dee Thomas from What’s Happening!! … She broke barriers, made us laugh and inspired a generation. Make it make sense! To leave her out is not just an oversight; it’s an injustice to her legacy. We will honor her, even if they didn’t.”
Peete wrote on Instagram
Her words reflect a feeling shared by many: exclusion from such a public tribute feels like being erased, especially when someone’s contributions remain meaningful to fans and peers.
Like Holly, when TV icon Phylicia Rashad opened the “In Memoriam” segment of the show by honoring Malcolm-Jamal Warner, many fans felt a surge of hope that Danielle Spencer would surely be included next. The moment seemed tailor-made for a continuum of beloved Black television figures whose work shaped a generation. That hope was sharpened by a recent disappointment elsewhere in pop culture: just a few weeks earlier, viewers criticized MTV for failing to acknowledge Ananda Lewis during its own remembrance segment. Taken together, the omissions raised fresh questions about how — and why — certain figures are left out of high-profile tributes, even when their contributions were groundbreaking.
Danielle Spencer’s brother, jazz trumpeter Jeremy Pelt, was the first to publicly react to the Emmys omission. On Instagram, he posted a simple but pointed message:
“Don’t know why I should be surprised that #Emmys2025 forgot my sister in the memoriam segment, but alas…” 💔
His words captured both resignation and heartbreak, showing how the omission resonated personally with Spencer’s family. By sharing the post publicly, Pelt underscored that this was not just a moment of celebrity outrage but a deep family wound, a reminder that behind every name in an “In Memoriam” montage is a network of loved ones who want their legacy honored.
The Television Academy responded by noting that the televised “In Memoriam” segment inevitably has limitations due to time constraints. They explained that a more extensive video was made available on the Emmys’ official website, where Danielle Spencer was included, along with many others who did not make the broadcast.
While this “extended tribute” helps cover more names, for those watching the live broadcast, the absence is still felt.
Fans and fellow performers have echoed Peete’s sentiment, asking whether the broadcast selection process is transparent enough, and whether people of color, women, or certain roles are more likely to be omitted. Media outlets have raised questions about how “who gets remembered on air” becomes a proxy for who is considered “important enough” in legacy terms.
This underscores a tension between the logistical constraints of live television and the emotional expectations of audiences who believe remembrance conveys respect and honor.
Is it reasonable to expect every notable figure be included in the televised In Memoriam? Perhaps not logistically. But omissions, especially of people whose work has clearly impacted many, risk sending unintended messages. When institutional recognition is uneven, legacies can be shadowed, even if offline or online tributes affirm value.
Representation also matters: omissions disproportionately affect marginalized communities or those whose contributions have been historically undervalued. The very act of remembrance is part of how cultural history is written and preserved.
The controversy over Danielle Spencer’s omission from the Emmys’ televised tribute may be uncomfortable, but it raises important questions about legacy, memory, and how we honor those who made us laugh, taught us, or inspired us. Moving forward, perhaps awards shows can adopt clearer criteria, communicate them publicly, and consider hybrid formats (broadcast + online) that serve both immediacy and inclusivity.
Regardless of the oversight, Spencer’s influence lives on, “her laughter, her barrier-breaking, her inspiration remain in the hearts of those who admired her. And that, ultimately, is what remembrance is all about.
Discover more from MidScroll
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
