“The Times is leaderless right now,” one staffer said. “Jill is very, very unpopular.” – Turbulence at the Times, by Dylan Byers
THE New York Times managing editor admits to having a “tantrum” after talking to his boss, but it’s Executive Editor Jill Abramson who is the problem. Calling Sheryl Sandberg, chick etiquette on leadership needed stat at the New York Times, because Dylan Byers’ anonymous sources are upset.
Poynter analyzes the piece by Byers and isn’t impressed either. From Poynter:
Politico’s “˜turbulence’ story about New York Times’ Jill Abramson: All wind
It mixes anonymously voiced insider accounts with a few protesting on-the-record sources to paint a picture of a newsroom so buffeted by personality conflicts that it just barely won four Pulitzer Prizes and calmly and accurately guided readers through the Boston bombings.
[…]Ã‚Â OK, great, but if you set up a personality conflict piece, you shouldn’t keep shooting your premise in the foot with phrases like “Abramson is still respected there, while few doubt her wisdom or her experience” or with quotes from anonymous sources saying, “She’s an incredible talent. There’s no question she deserves to be where she is.”
Abramson is “brusque.” Once she made someone change a photo on the homepage, and she wasn’t nice about it. Her voice is unpleasant. She’s not in the newsroom as much as some staffers would like. And “¦ that’s basically the prosecution’s case here.
In Sandberg’s book she unwraps why strong females in leadership positions aren’t liked. She then gives a list of ways to get around this challenge to make people like you, while admitting it’s a crushing annoyance to have to bother, but suggests some of them may help navigate around the pit vipers.
As this story on Jill Abramson proves if a woman isn’t liked she gets hit pieces on her in the press. I’ve been writing this story for years, so it’s no shock to me.
The tweets Poynter uploads from females on the Byers piece are classic.