The New York Times (5/14/14) announced that Jill Abramson, who has the top editorial job there of executive editor, is being replaced by current managing editor Dean Baquet. The Times‘ news account of the change said that publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. “declined to directly address the question he said was ‘on all of your minds’—the reason for the sudden switch,” but cited an unspecified “issue with management in the newsroom.”
The New Yorker‘s Ken Auletta (5/14/14) reported that Abramson was perceived by Times management as “pushy”—in part because she inquired into why she was paid less than her predecessor, Bill Keller. She also sparred with Times Co. CEO Mark Thompson over “native advertising”—the practice of allowing sponsors to disguise their ads as news content (FAIR Blog, 11/22/13)—and the growing influence of the business side of the paper over editorial. Auletta also mentions that Abramson was perceived as a supporter of investigative reporting—”at a time when Bloomberg News pulled the plug on an investigation of corruption and the princelings in China, Abramson pushed the Times to do more, even after her reporters came under pressure in China”—though he doesn’t cite this as a reason that she was fired.
The influential political gossip website Politico (4/23/14) had a piece last month that alleged newsroom unhappiness over Abramson, but it was remarkably short on substance; Abramson was said to be “condescending” and to have a voice like a “nasal car honk,” whereas “Dean makes people feel good.”
Whether Baquet will be good for investigative reporting at the Times remains to be seen. When he served as editor of the L.A. Times, he was responsible for killing a piece that would have exposed government monitoring of US internet traffic via “secret NSA rooms” at AT&T switching centers, a story disclosed by whistleblower Mark Klein. ABC News‘ Brian Ross (3/6/07) later wrote:
Klein says he decided to take his documents to the Los Angeles Times, to blow the whistle on what he calls “an illegal and Orwellian project.” But after working for two months with L.A. Times reporter Joe Menn, Klein says he was told the story had been killed at the request of then-Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte and then-director of the NSA Gen. Michael Hayden.
The Los Angeles Times‘ decision was made by the paper’s editor at the time, Dean Baquet, now the Washington bureau chief of the New York Times. Baquet confirmed to ABCNews.com he talked with Negroponte and Hayden but says “government pressure played no role in my decision not to run the story.”
Baquet says he and managing editor Doug Frantz decided “we did not have a story, that we could not figure out what was going on” based on Klein’s highly technical documents. The reporter, Menn, declined to comment, but Baquet says he knows “Joe disagreed and was very disappointed.” Klein says he then took his AT&T documents to the New York Times, which published its exclusive account last April.
Later, working at the New York Times, Baquet justified an “informal arrangement among several news organizations” to comply with a government request to withhold from readers the fact that a US drone base was located in Saudi Arabia: “The Saudis might shut it down because the citizenry would be very upset,” Baquet told Times public editor Margaret Sullivan (FAIR Blog, 2/6/13). “We have to balance that concern with reporting the news.”
As FAIR’s Peter Hart noted at the time: “The Times believes that it should refrain from reporting news that people in Saudi Arabia might object to—especially if it wound up complicating our government’s plans to launch military attacks from their country.”
See also:
- “NYT‘s Pentagon Propaganda” (FAIR Action Alert, 5/27/09)
- “The NYT Thinks You’re an Idiot” (FAIR Blog, 8/23/13






Jill Abramson is being replaced with a Chicago man who looks like he is the perfect man to keep the readership of the New York Times informed.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/05/15/business/media/jill-abramson-being-replaced-as-top-editor-at-times.html?referrer=
Is he a strategic placement from Washington who knows how things operated there? His history shows both a close association to Washington and an alledged cover-up?
He may also have a “Bachelor of Benghazi Coverup” qualification like others have as, “In 2006, ABC News reported that Baquet killed a story about NSA wiretaps of Americans.” Definitely not Snowdens man…more like Obama’s man and a strategic placement for the intellectual class who are abandoning Obama over integrity issues.
The question for the intelligensia is how is this shift at the NYT any different from what the E.U in Brussels is doing to treat young voters as idiots. Look at the article below and you will be shocked beyond belief. In this case I could conceed that governments treat most people like idiots but some are treated as greater idiots than others.
The reality is that the Democrats are in damage control and all these intrusions by the Obama administration into the operations of the NSA and IRS and FCC and FEC need a man that the ABC claimed has a history of covering up.
The way governments are going they will be offering, “Degrees in Deceit” as a prerequisite for office.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2627473/Storm-smutty-cartoon-advert-designed-young-Danes-vote-uses-naked-women-topless-man-couple-having-sex.html?ico=worldnews%5Eheadlines
This is bad news. Abramson was slowly changing the paper for the better–probably why she got the axe.
@ Michael: I’m afraid you’re right.
“Whether Baquet will be good for investigative reporting at the Times remains to be seen.”
?
Check that
???? … !
The word at the “job” is that she was slow on the tech part of the job.More interested in being the PR face, and less in doing the hard gritty day to day work.In short they felt she was simply doing a bad job.Get over it.We all have been canned
and Simonzee1 is trusting the Daily Mail as a new source?
and Simonzee1 is trusting the Daily Mail as a news source?
This is a most infuriating article from FAIR. This site has weekly if not daily exposures and criticisms of NYT’s disinformation, cover-ups of US government and corporate malfeasance, and long-term lockstep regurgitating of State Dept. / White House propaganda.
Then the NYT’s female executive editor is fired and FAIR suddenly pitches her as feminist martyr of the fourth estate — e.g the 2nd gossipy paragraph — and all the BS the NYT churned out under Abramson and which FAIR regularly documented gets subsumed into ‘equal pay for equal work’ conjecture and decidedly vague promotion of Abramson as some kind of ‘investigative journalism’ editor, the latter due to allegations against CPC leadership?!? Couldn’t a single better example have been presented to give the canned executive credit for supporting ‘investigative journalism’, like some whistle-blowing story within the newspaper’s own country or better yet regarding the federal government which it is the NYT’s purported mandate to be watching?!? The absence of such an example is damning.
Even if this dismissal is some kind of retaliation for gender pay inequity, which is not established yet, I do not give a damn what any “Mighty Wurlitzer”-helming indoctrinator gets compensated, their labor is pernicious to the public and humanity at large; be they a Mr. or Ms., Caucasian or not — the medium’s message is what matters and if it’s a dirty propaganda paper for dirty wars and dirty profits such as NYT…what does that say about any given editor or publisher who produces it.
HARD TO BE WORSE THAN ABRAMSON.
HARD TO FIND SOMEONE WORSE THAN ABRAMSON.