Skip to comments.Times Publisher Gives Details on Top Editor's Dismissal
Posted on 05/17/2014 4:29:51 PM PDT by EveningStar
Arthur Sulzberger Jr., the publisher of The New York Times, released a statement Saturday afternoon detailing his decision to fire the newspapers executive editor, Jill Abramson. He was responding to a growing controversy over accusations by Ms. Abramsons supporters that gender played a role in her dismissal.
The decision to remove her, which was announced on Wednesday, has been cast by many as an example of the unequal treatment of women in the workplace, Mr. Sulzberger wrote. Instead, the statement said, it was a situation involving a specific individual who, as we all do, has strengths and weaknesses.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Full CYA mode.
It’s great to see leftists choke on the garbage that they have been feeding the rest of us for all these years.
Doesn't matter. Disparate impact, baby. Individual strengths/weaknesses don't count.
At least that's what you liberals have been spouting for the past 40 years.
I nominate Brent Bozell as her replacement.
Why does an individual’s “strengths and weaknesses” never seem to matter when it’s a conservative firing a woman? Then, it’s a generalized “Conservatives’ War on Women,” that resulted in the termination.
Liberal hypocrisy never fails to astound me.
I don’t believe it! It is the left’s war on women! The NYTs is ran by oppressive white liberal men!
They are hypocrites, all those white liberal men on the NYTs.
Send them to re-education camps, filthy vile oppressors of women! How can this happen in this age of tolerance?
Welcome to the real world Pinch. Hope you enjoy it. ;~))
Yes indeed. While liberal hypocrisy is in full bloom here, feel no sympathy for Abramson. She's about as vicious a Marxist radical as ever typed a story. She and co-maggot Jane Mayer wrote one of the nastiest pieces of so-called "journalism" in existence during confirmation hearings for Justice Clarence Thomas. I've hated both of them with absolute passion ever since. The attack was nothing but lies, racism, nasty insinuations and defamatory accusations made up out of the whole cloth.
I haven't seen anybody mention this yet, but just last week Jill Abramson was mentioned as #5 on this list of 5 Non-Fox News Journalists Who Won't Give Obama a Break.
Within a week, she's been fired.
Now we know.
From the article:
His new statement cited a pattern of behavior that included arbitrary decision-making, a failure to consult and bring colleagues with her, inadequate communication and the public mistreatment of colleagues.
he ultimately concluded that she had lost the support of her masthead colleagues and could not win it back. The decision to replace her, he said, was for reasons having nothing to do with pay or gender.
I guess we now know why she "lost support" of her "colleagues." If she had "consulted" and "bring colleagues with her," she would not have been a "journalist who won't give Obama a break." Her colleagues wouldn't have let her.
It's all so very clear now.
I’ll bet that all it took was one phone call from Valerie Jarrett.
Maybe even threatened seat assignment in the press room, too.
Groupthink. It is all so simple.
Since when do libs see the individual?
It turns out her primary weakness was her poor performance in Pinch’s bed
She apparently just lay there and moaned once in a while
Pinch better check his priviledge.
Pinch better check his priviledge.
Jill Abramson is a tramp Democrat, she is NOT a journalist and is NOT fit for any nes publication, so what`s the big deal.
The NY Times is an abomination along with anybody that has ever worked there in modern times