Jill Abramson: War on Women? more unequal pay

Washingtonpost.com:

The New York Times abruptly replaced its executive editor, Jill Abramson, on Wednesday, ending what had been a sometimes stormy 32-month tenure by the first woman to lead the prestigious newspaper in its 163-year history.

The Times said Abramson will be succeeded by her top deputy, Dean Baquet, the managing editor.

Abramson, who worked in Washington for the Wall Street Journal and later was the Times’s Washington bureau chief, apparently was fired by Arthur Sulzberger Jr., the chairman of the New York Times Co. and publisher of the paper.

In remarks to the newspaper’s journalists disclosing the management change, Sulzberger never explicitly said Abramson, 60, had been terminated. But he made no effort to suggest that she was leaving of her own accord. He said he chose “to appoint a new leader for our newsroom because I believe that new leadership will improve some aspects of the management of the newsroom.”

He added, “You will understand that there is nothing more I am going to say about this, but I want to assure all of you that there is nothing more at issue here.”

In its coverage of the change, the Times said that Abramson had been “dismissed.” She did not appear at the newsroom meeting at which her departure was announced. The Times said she and Baquet weren’t giving interviews.

Putting an ear to the ground this morning, it appears that Abramson’s ousting was more of a case of Lillie Ledbetter.  Abramson discovered that she was making considerably less than her predecessors, not once but twice.  she attempted to remedy the situation and instantly got branded as a trouble maker.

Some of the males in off the record remarks had labeled her as quarrelsome and abrupt.  Were she a male, wouldn’t these personality traits be described as assertive, fierce and dynamic?   Society tends to admire males with those attributes in the business world.

The glass ceiling shattered on Abramson.  However, the fight has just begun.