Was She Too … Bossy?

Posted on | May 16, 2014 | 26 Comments

Gossip swirls after New York Times publisher Pinch Sulzberger fires the paper’s top editor Jill Abramson:

Sulzberger and Abramson had a fraught relationship almost from the start of her tenure as executive editor, nearly three years ago. He saw her as difficult, high-handed, and lacking in finesse in her management of people at the paper. She, in turn, was increasingly resentful of his intrusions into her command of editorial operations, and of his increasingly close relationship with Mark Thompson, the company’s C.E.O., who came from England and the BBC to run the business side.
It is always hard to say what causes a final break—a firing, a divorce—but, clearly, a last straw came a few weeks ago, when Abramson, who made little secret of her displeasure with Sulzberger, decided to hire a lawyer to complain that her salary was not equal to that of her predecessor, Bill Keller. She had also been told by reliable sources at the paper that, as managing editor, she had once earned less than the managing editor of news operations, John Geddes. Abramson’s attempt to raise the salary issue at a time when tempers were already frayed seemed wrongheaded to Sulzberger and Thompson, both on its merits and in terms of her approach. Bringing in a lawyer, in particular, seems to have struck them as especially combative. Eileen Murphy, a spokeswoman for the Times, argued that there was no real compensation gap, but conceded to me that “this incident was a contributing factor” to the firing of Abramson, because “it was part of a pattern. . . .
Another episode that added to the characterization of Abramson as hard to deal with came after a decision was made to hire a second managing editor to oversee the Times’ digital endeavors. Abramson led that hiring effort. The Times, in its story on Abramson’s dismissal, said that Abramson had offered the job to Janine Gibson, the editor of Guardian U.S., “without consulting” Dean Baquet, then the managing editor and now Abramson’s successor. This implies that Abramson was operating more or less in a vacuum, without consistent consultations with her colleagues, particularly Baquet. Gibson met separately with Sulzberger and Thompson on May 5th, and had lunch with Baquet that same day. What Baquet did not know, until Gibson herself mentioned it to him at lunch, I’m told, is that she was offered a managing-editor job comparable to his own. . . .

Abramson offended the patriarchy! The New York Times is sexist! Has Amanda Marcotte reacted to this news yet?

UPDATE: Haven’t found Marcotte’s reaction yet, but the headline at the feminist blog Jezebel is: “Jill Abramson and Those Goddamn Pushy Female Bosses”:

Abramson had been a staunch advocate for women at the Times, but it was clear that gender imbalance remained an issue at the paper , and not only on the masthead. In a piece about the gap in byline counts this week, Times ombudsman Margaret Sullivan lamented that, “After three decades in journalism, I find it hard to believe that — while things have changed radically in some ways — there’s still such a gender imbalance.”

Yeah, baby! Patriarchy wins again!

Category: Feminism, Journalism, New York Times

Comments

26 Responses to “Was She Too … Bossy?”

Quartermaster
May 16th, 2014 @ 9:28 am

In this case, her fiddly bits won’t amount to anything. This is the old grey hag were talking about – the official house organ of the screaming left. She might win a discrimination suit, but that won’t affect the NYT’s standing among the left.
Jill Abramson Rule 5 | Batshit Crazy News
May 16th, 2014 @ 10:09 am

[…] TOM notes: Was Jill Abramson fired for being…bossy? Of course I have heard another “b” word thrown around too. And why was Jill Abramson paid less than the boys at the New York Times? Why isn’t the White House deriding this women getting less pay than her male counterparts (well because the Obama White House does that too)? But never let a Rule 5 opportunity go to waste: […]
Kirby McCain
May 16th, 2014 @ 10:33 am

She’ll never win a discrimination suit. She had a top post. Her successor is African American. She’ll get some go away money.
richard mcenroe
May 16th, 2014 @ 11:05 am

Ah, Pinch, Baquet and the limey are probably all just gay and didn’t want a gurl in the clubhouse unless she was as insecure as Deborah Messing on Will & Grace…
JeffS
May 16th, 2014 @ 11:22 am

“Bossy”? RAAAAACIST!!!!!

Consider yourself duly denounced.
Evi L. Bloggerlady
May 16th, 2014 @ 11:31 am

Plus she is a girl and feminism only goes so far with good ol boy Democrats.
Evi L. Bloggerlady
May 16th, 2014 @ 11:32 am

Bossy is code for a different “B” word
Dana
May 16th, 2014 @ 11:49 am

Mrs Abramson came to the Times from The Wall Street Journal. At the Journal, they don’t suffer fools gladly, and people there have to know something about economics and business. Throw her into command at a place like the NYT, and of course there’s going to be friction.
Evi L. Bloggerlady
May 16th, 2014 @ 1:27 pm

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-lU0gY_tudPs/U3ZJdIS_ROI/AAAAAAAAhxk/RYblmpC0I-U/s1600/Pinch.PNG
robertstacymccain
May 16th, 2014 @ 1:46 pm

The Beast of Babylon wears bangs, you know.
Quartermaster
May 16th, 2014 @ 2:10 pm

She might win a suit. We’ll have to see what she does and what happens. Most suits never go to trial because they are settled.
Dana
May 16th, 2014 @ 2:18 pm

The lovely Miss Marcotte wrote:

As she’s also the first woman to hold the job in the paper’s history, accusations of sexism against publisher Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., began immediately.

Uhhh, given that it was also Mr Sulzberger who hired her in the first place, and then promoted her, such accusations would hardly seem fair.
PCachu
May 16th, 2014 @ 2:54 pm

Old and Busted: #BanBossy
The New (York Times) Hotness: #CanBossy

– stealin’ the Ewok’s punchlines so you don’t have to!
Remember When Scientists Didn’t Have ‘Causes’? | Regular Right Guy
May 16th, 2014 @ 4:12 pm

[…] Was She Too … Bossy? […]
Generally Speaking, @AmandaMarcotte Is Insane, and Feminism Is Always Wrong : The Other McCain
May 16th, 2014 @ 5:03 pm

[…] now, reacting to the firing of Jill Abramson discussed previously, we encounter this commentary from Amanda […]
Adjoran
May 16th, 2014 @ 5:44 pm

Rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic again. It doesn’t matter much.

With all their reporters and resources, NYT’s digital editions and webpages only attract about 10 times the daily hits of Instapundit, a one-man operation, and about 30 times the hits of Power Line, whose monthly expenses run under $1000.

Face it: without Carlos Slim’s big fat ego and mountain of money wrung from Mexico’s poor citizens by his monopoly, NYT would have been sold to satisfy creditors years ago, and Pinch would be trying to explain to the over 200 members of the Sulzberger-Ochs family whose only income is NYT dividends paid to their preferred class of stock that, “You f-ed up, you trusted me.”
Bob Belvedere
May 16th, 2014 @ 11:32 pm

…and Prada.

The Book Of Revlon, 13:1…
And I stood upon the sand of the internets, and saw a beastie rise up out of the internets, having seven bangs and ten mouths, and upon her mouths ten crowns of Prada, and upon her bangs the name of blasphemy.

Revlon, 17:4-5…
4 And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, like Carrie Bradshaw, having a golden cup of Haagen Dazs in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication with a boy cladeth in pajamas:
5 And upon her wrinkled forehead was a name written, Mystery, Babylon The Great, The Mother Of Harlots And Abominations Of The Earth.
Matt_SE
May 17th, 2014 @ 12:05 am

I have a solution so simple, it will never be tried:
Abramson should start her own paper, with nothing but women employees. I’m sure such an intelligent lady will be able to find *some* way of legally not hiring men.
With no men around (or excuses), I’m sure the prosperity will come rolling in.
cmdr358
May 17th, 2014 @ 10:41 am

Biggety?
cmdr358
May 17th, 2014 @ 10:49 am

Fair? Fair? What’s that got to do with it?

After all this is another battle in the War Against Womyn and part of the heteromasculine master plan to keep wimmin in their place.
[end sarc.]
Evi L. Bloggerlady
May 17th, 2014 @ 10:53 am

Yeah, I suppose that too!
Evi L. Bloggerlady
May 17th, 2014 @ 10:54 am

But Bob, the banged beast does not wear makeup…
Bob Belvedere
May 17th, 2014 @ 4:33 pm

Where did the passages mention make-up?
Bob Belvedere
May 17th, 2014 @ 4:34 pm
Bob Belvedere
May 17th, 2014 @ 4:35 pm

Yeah…it would publish every day, except for every 28th day.
NYT: Tattoo This, Jill Abramson! | Regular Right Guy
May 18th, 2014 @ 12:53 pm

[…] UPDATE: Here’s another take by Robert Stacy McCain. […]