'NY Times' publisher outlines Abramson ouster, denies sexism

Paper's publisher says removal of top editor was due to her bad management skills, not gender bias.

By REUTERS
May 18, 2014 03:26
1 minute read.
nytimes

Jill Abramson. (photo credit: REUTERS)

 
X

Dear Reader,
As you can imagine, more people are reading The Jerusalem Post than ever before. Nevertheless, traditional business models are no longer sustainable and high-quality publications, like ours, are being forced to look for new ways to keep going. Unlike many other news organizations, we have not put up a paywall. We want to keep our journalism open and accessible and be able to keep providing you with news and analyses from the frontlines of Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish World.

As one of our loyal readers, we ask you to be our partner.

For $5 a month you will receive access to the following:

  • A user uxperience almost completely free of ads
  • Access to our Premium Section and our monthly magazine to learn Hebrew, Ivrit
  • Content from the award-winning Jerusalem Repor
  • A brand new ePaper featuring the daily newspaper as it appears in print in Israel

Help us grow and continue telling Israel’s story to the world.

Thank you,

Ronit Hasin-Hochman, CEO, Jerusalem Post Group
Yaakov Katz, Editor-in-Chief

UPGRADE YOUR JPOST EXPERIENCE FOR 5$ PER MONTH Show me later Don't show it again



NEW YORK - New York Times Co publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. on Saturday denied the ouster of top editor Jill Abramson was due to gender bias and listed ways in which she was a bad manager.



Be the first to know - Join our Facebook page.


Sulzberger issued a statement that identified a pattern of behavior including "arbitrary decision-making, a failure to consult and bring colleagues with her, inadequate communication and the public mistreatment of colleagues" as reasons for the firing.



Abramson, the Times' first woman executive editor, was abruptly ousted on Wednesday in a decision that sparked a firestorm of commentary on women managers in the workplace. There was media speculation that her firing was linked to gender issues, including her reported complaint that she was not as well compensated as her male predecessor.



He denounced these as "persistent but incorrect reports."



Sulzberger said that "the saddest outcome" of his decision to remove Abramson was that it "has been cast by many as an example of the unequal treatment of women in the workplace." Instead, he said it was "a situation involving a specific individual who, as we all do, has strengths and weaknesses."



The New Yorker reported earlier this week that Abramson had confronted Times' executives after she discovered her pay and pension benefits were less than those of Bill Keller, whom she succeeded, citing an unidentified close associate of Abramson.





"This is untrue," Sulzberger said, adding that Abramson's package was more than 10 percent higher that his in her last year as editor.



Sulzberger said "she had lost the support of her masthead colleagues and could not win it back," according to the Times.



He said he has spoken to the Times news staff and that they understood the decision and why he made it.

The shakeup is the latest sign of turmoil at the New York Times, which is controlled by the Ochs-Sulzberger family. It has been selling assets, cutting staff and looking for new revenue sources as print advertising revenue declines.

Related Content

kurds syria
July 22, 2018
Iran and Turkey pressure Kurdish groups on different fronts

By SETH J. FRANTZMAN