Jill Abramson, the former New York Times executive editor, excoriated her previous employer for its treatment of reporter Ali Watkins, accusing the paper’s writers of hanging “a 26-year-old-woman out to dry” by airing her personal life in a sordid and professionally damaging way.
According to a Thursday Daily Beast report, Abramson came to the defense of the young reporter who got tangled in a leak investigation concerning her ex-boyfriend, a former staffer on the Senate Intelligence Committee.
Abramson said that the Times’ exposé “aired her sex life and conflicts while not probing why she was hired, responsibility of editors, or, most crucially, the value of her journalism (her Carter Page scoop in BuzzFeed actually helped lead to the appointment of Mueller).”
“That story hung a 26-year-old young woman out to dry,” she continued. “It was unimaginable to me what the pain must be like for her.”
She added that the piece was akin to a “steamy romance novel in parts,” and hammered the paper’s nonchalance in its handling of the professional ramifications Watkins would undoubtedly face. “It’s just crucifying,” she said. “How do you then show up for work? I don’t see a good resolution for that.”
Times spokeswoman Eileen Murphy sent a statement to TPM in response to Abramson’s critiques: “We have enormous respect for Jill and deeply appreciate her passion and dedication to The Times. Criticism and feedback helps us do better work and we’re always open to it. On these specifics though, we just disagree with Jill.”
Abramson also took issue with what she claims was the Times’ ignorance of local candidate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s meteoric rise until the huge upset Tuesday night, as well as their participation in the Showtime documentary series “The Fourth Estate” which she called “narcissism”
Can’t wait for the NYT expose of Iowa folk and how they feel about Cortez’s victory. Should be something.
“But but but…Trump was being mean to us!!!”
This specific situation seems pretty messy and complicated, but in the larger conversation, institutions like the NYT seem far too cowed with playing the political game of pre-reacting to outraeg [sic] from professional outraeg purveyors on the right.
What, some hilljack Sinclair station from East Jesus, Arkansas is going to shriek about librul bias? Okay, whatever, they’re going to do that anyway. You’re the New York damn Times. Make your decisions, stand by them, and dare anybody else to challenge you.
Of course, this is not limited to just the media. If you adhere to the good-faith interpretation (as I do), this is exactly the mistake James Comey made in late 2016.
To which Times spokeswoman Eileen Murphy replied, “Who?"
This is one of the many reasons I dropped my subscription to the NYT…back in the Bush years.
I can however use my several devices if I want to read an article as each gets 10 freebies a month from NYT - up to 40 for me. Funny thing though…I never seem to come close to using them all and the ones I do are Krugman.