"That's what happened to me," she explained. "I've devoted my whole career to truth-telling, so why hide that?"
Abramson told Van Susteren that she hadn't seen her abrupt dismissal coming, although she said she had experienced a "normal" amount of "bumps and difficult situations" with some people at the Times. She described the firing as "hurtful," particularly because its details became so public.
“It was said [I was fired] because of my management style," Abramson said. "I’m a hard-charging editor and I’m sure that there were some people who worked for me who didn’t like that style. I think for a lot of people they liked that, they liked that I was kind of a stand up editor."
Abramson's gender played prominently in the media coverage of her firing, but when Van Susteren asked her whether a male editor would have been fired for having the same management style, Abramson demurred.
"What I do think broadly is that definitely, women in leadership roles are scrutinized constantly and sometimes differently than men," she said. "Qualities that are seen as showing leadership or being assertive in men are seen — there are certain code words, 'strident, 'too tough,' whatever. That's just the world we live in."
The fired editor said she has no hard feelings against the Times after her dismissal, though, and she actually gets to spend more time reading the newspaper now that she no longer works there.
"The bottom line of the situation is that when I was executive editor, I loved The New York Times and so believe that it's the best publication there is," she said. "After I was fired, I believe exactly the same thing. I love it, I spend more time reading it now than I could when I worked there."
Watch below, courtesy of Fox News: