The liberal NYT paid their female top editor less than their male top editor

[JakeStarkey]

Post the figures and let the brass explain it, not LiberalMedia pontificating.

Were the salaries different? Were all parties aware of it from the beginning? Is it justified based on the quality of work by the parties?

 

[NYcarbineer]

When Jill Abramson found out she was being paid less than her predecessor, Bill Keller...she complained and then was subsequently fired.

NYT Publisher Sulzberger Says Abramson Firing Driven by Conduct - Bloomberg

What's the rule that says one is guaranteed the salary of one's predecessor, in a position of that nature?

 

[Oldstyle]

Not for the same work--for less work. From the article:



This strong, independent womyn made great decisions all on her own, didn't need to check with anyone else because she had her act together, didn't constantly micromanage her underlings thus allowing them free reign over their own work, and didn't put up with any BS from misogynistic male coworkers. The male chauvinist pigs at the New York Times were having extreme difficulties in keeping their glass ceiling from cracking, as evidenced by Abramson's successes in the face of NYT's blatant sexism, and they knew they had to fire hyr if they were going to continue to keep womyn everywhere down.

Having been finally publicly exposed as the den of womyn-hating basement-dwellers they are, NYT's days are numbered. It's only a matter of time before a massive lawsuit gets filed against them by Abramson (wrongful termination, discrimination, backpay, etc.) and every other strong, independent womyn they've ever financially and professionally raped in this manner.

Good riddance to that conservatard propaganda machine.

Now THAT rant is simply priceless! The New York Times is a "conservatard propaganda machine"? Really? I mean REALLY? I suppose MSNBC is as well? The Huffington Post? Think Progress?

1. Yes really.
2. MSNBC usually has a liberal slant.
3. HuffPo is mostly moderate, with a few raging conservatard discriminators thrown in on occasion.
4. TP leans slightly to the left, albeit in a limp-wristed fashion.

Let's cut through all the bullshit here, Kiddies...the New York Times low balled the first woman Editor in Chief after pontificating about wage inequality for women for the better part of two decades. Shame on them. If you're going to talk the talk...then you need to walk the walk!

The New York Times is just as liberal TODAY as they were last week. The only thing that is different is that they've been exposed for playing the "do as I say...not as I do" game.

OK, find me a New York Times article "pontificating about wage inequality for women" written by the male chauvinist pig that paid Abramson less.

You amuse me...I mean you REALLY amuse me! The New York Times is a conservative paper? MSNBC "usually" has a liberal slant? The Huffington Post is mostly moderate? Think Progress leans "slightly" to the left?

Do you not grasp that I was mocking you when I mentioned those other liberal media outlets? The fact that you DON'T see those four organizations as fervently liberal in their outlook blows my mind. The New York Times ITSELF admits that it has a liberal bias! MSNBC is SO slanted to the left that "usually" doesn't apply...the word you're looking for would be "steadfastly". The Huffington Post is well known for pushing a liberal agenda and has been proudly doing so for well over a decade. If Think Progress leaned any FURTHER to the left it would standing on it's head.

So my question for you is this...are you being deliberately obtuse...or are you really this unaware of reality?

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

LM: You came here to troll and spoonfeed us a load of garbage. I don't care if you call NYT 'liberal' by whatever standard you have. But they are basically a propaganda wing of the Democrat party, who is the more liberal party. If you try to sell us less; just save your breath.

 

[LiberalMedia]

Now THAT rant is simply priceless! The New York Times is a "conservatard propaganda machine"? Really? I mean REALLY? I suppose MSNBC is as well? The Huffington Post? Think Progress?

1. Yes really.
2. MSNBC usually has a liberal slant.
3. HuffPo is mostly moderate, with a few raging conservatard discriminators thrown in on occasion.
4. TP leans slightly to the left, albeit in a limp-wristed fashion.

Let's cut through all the bullshit here, Kiddies...the New York Times low balled the first woman Editor in Chief after pontificating about wage inequality for women for the better part of two decades. Shame on them. If you're going to talk the talk...then you need to walk the walk!

The New York Times is just as liberal TODAY as they were last week. The only thing that is different is that they've been exposed for playing the "do as I say...not as I do" game.

OK, find me a New York Times article "pontificating about wage inequality for women" written by the male chauvinist pig that paid Abramson less.

You amuse me...I mean you REALLY amuse me! The New York Times is a conservative paper? MSNBC "usually" has a liberal slant? The Huffington Post is mostly moderate? Think Progress leans "slightly" to the left?

Do you not grasp that I was mocking you when I mentioned those other liberal media outlets? The fact that you DON'T see those four organizations as fervently liberal in their outlook blows my mind. The New York Times ITSELF admits that it has a liberal bias! MSNBC is SO slanted to the left that "usually" doesn't apply...the word you're looking for would be "steadfastly". The Huffington Post is well known for pushing a liberal agenda and has been proudly doing so for well over a decade. If Think Progress leaned any FURTHER to the left it would standing on it's head.

So my question for you is this...are you being deliberately obtuse...or are you really this unaware of reality?

First, HuffPo isn't the raging liberal organization you're trying to make it out to be. They have articles on explicitly conservatard issues, such as Tea Party victories, a push for celibacy until marriage, Edward 'I Love America' Snowden (this one is hosted on Wired, but is linked to by HuffPo on their Tech page), telling people to eat unhealthy food all they want because it's their choice no matter what First Lady Michelle Obama says, why it's bad to drink your own urine, and why political correctness is bad and why you should devote specific attention to a person's race in any situation no matter what. So before you embark on yet another rant about how every media organization ever is run by evil librulls out to get you, review those HuffPo articles and open your eyes to the raging conservatard influence in the media.

Second, I notice that you dedicated your entire post to a pretentious "You believe WHAT! I can't BELIEVE it! You're CRAZY! How can you THINK that!" tirade and have failed address the challenge I posed to you. If you really think that the NYT is a liberal organization "playing the 'do as I say...not as I do' game" (in your own words), then find me an article on the issue of gender inequality written by the chauvinist that paid Abramson less. This is the only way to prove a double standard and, if you cannot fulfill it in your next post, I will assume that you are silently admitting defeat and declaring the NYT to be a fair and balanced media outlet with outstanding, unbiased coverage and absolutely no double standards.

 

[LiberalMedia]

LM: You came here to troll and spoonfeed us a load of garbage. I don't care if you call NYT 'liberal' by whatever standard you have. But they are basically a propaganda wing of the Democrat party, who is the more liberal party. If you try to sell us less; just save your breath.

The fact that you see an honest, objective citizyn like myself trying to drag you back to reality and away from your delusional conservatard fantasies as "trolling" illustrates just how out of touch with common sense and the real world you are.

Your response to the truth is literally "Nah, has to be a troll." Unbelievable.

 

[bedowin62]

LM: You came here to troll and spoonfeed us a load of garbage. I don't care if you call NYT 'liberal' by whatever standard you have. But they are basically a propaganda wing of the Democrat party, who is the more liberal party. If you try to sell us less; just save your breath.

The fact that you see an honest, objective citizyn like myself trying to drag you back to reality and away from your delusional conservatard fantasies as "trolling" illustrates just how out of touch with common sense and the real world you are.

Your response to the truth is literally "Nah, has to be a troll." Unbelievable.

you are nothing but a blind, partisan hard-left SHEEP. if you had an ounce of shame you would avoid this particular thread like the plague; since you are a laughingstock of liberal HYPOCRISY.
how can you even begin to defend the blatant hypocrisy of the New York Times payinga woman less than a man FOR THE SAME JOB; given their rantings bout just that on their political pages and editorial pages?

unless of course YOU RE A BLIND HYPOCRITE CONDITIONED to project your failed ideology onto others

 

[Oldstyle]

1. Yes really.
2. MSNBC usually has a liberal slant.
3. HuffPo is mostly moderate, with a few raging conservatard discriminators thrown in on occasion.
4. TP leans slightly to the left, albeit in a limp-wristed fashion.




OK, find me a New York Times article "pontificating about wage inequality for women" written by the male chauvinist pig that paid Abramson less.

You amuse me...I mean you REALLY amuse me! The New York Times is a conservative paper? MSNBC "usually" has a liberal slant? The Huffington Post is mostly moderate? Think Progress leans "slightly" to the left?

Do you not grasp that I was mocking you when I mentioned those other liberal media outlets? The fact that you DON'T see those four organizations as fervently liberal in their outlook blows my mind. The New York Times ITSELF admits that it has a liberal bias! MSNBC is SO slanted to the left that "usually" doesn't apply...the word you're looking for would be "steadfastly". The Huffington Post is well known for pushing a liberal agenda and has been proudly doing so for well over a decade. If Think Progress leaned any FURTHER to the left it would standing on it's head.

So my question for you is this...are you being deliberately obtuse...or are you really this unaware of reality?

First, HuffPo isn't the raging liberal organization you're trying to make it out to be. They have articles on explicitly conservatard issues, such as Tea Party victories, a push for celibacy until marriage, Edward 'I Love America' Snowden (this one is hosted on Wired, but is linked to by HuffPo on their Tech page), telling people to eat unhealthy food all they want because it's their choice no matter what First Lady Michelle Obama says, why it's bad to drink your own urine, and why political correctness is bad and why you should devote specific attention to a person's race in any situation no matter what. So before you embark on yet another rant about how every media organization ever is run by evil librulls out to get you, review those HuffPo articles and open your eyes to the raging conservatard influence in the media.

Second, I notice that you dedicated your entire post to a pretentious "You believe WHAT! I can't BELIEVE it! You're CRAZY! How can you THINK that!" tirade and have failed address the challenge I posed to you. If you really think that the NYT is a liberal organization "playing the 'do as I say...not as I do' game" (in your own words), then find me an article on the issue of gender inequality written by the chauvinist that paid Abramson less. This is the only way to prove a double standard and, if you cannot fulfill it in your next post, I will assume that you are silently admitting defeat and declaring the NYT to be a fair and balanced media outlet with outstanding, unbiased coverage and absolutely no double standards.

First of all the man who fired Abramson is the publisher, Arthur Salzberger Jr.. He runs the paper...he doesn't write for the paper. The best place to gauge the New York Times for it's "views" is quite obviously in it's editorial page. Like the following from just weeks ago.


http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/10/opinion/the-truth-about-the-pay-gap.html

That was early April of this year. In that piece you've got the Times Editorial Board criticizing the GOP for not passing law to mandate equal pay...then criticizing the Obama White House for not having equal pay...but as they are doing that...they are working for an organization that was paying Jill Abramson less than her male predecessor to do the same job yet none of them seemed to feel that was an issue.

 

[Oldstyle]

LM: You came here to troll and spoonfeed us a load of garbage. I don't care if you call NYT 'liberal' by whatever standard you have. But they are basically a propaganda wing of the Democrat party, who is the more liberal party. If you try to sell us less; just save your breath.

The fact that you see an honest, objective citizyn like myself trying to drag you back to reality and away from your delusional conservatard fantasies as "trolling" illustrates just how out of touch with common sense and the real world you are.

Your response to the truth is literally "Nah, has to be a troll." Unbelievable.

If you can sit here and declare that the New York Times is a "conservatard" newspaper spewing out conservative propaganda then you are either one of the more clueless posters on the board or you wear such partisan blinders that you can convince yourself that up is down and black is white. You think you're "objective"? Really?

 

[Oldstyle]

The following article is FROM the New York Times. It makes your claim that they are a conservative paper laughable.

THE PUBLIC EDITOR - Is The New York Times a Liberal Newspaper? - NYTimes.com

They not only admit it...they PROUDLY admit it!

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

LM: You came here to troll and spoonfeed us a load of garbage. I don't care if you call NYT 'liberal' by whatever standard you have. But they are basically a propaganda wing of the Democrat party, who is the more liberal party. If you try to sell us less; just save your breath.

The fact that you see an honest, objective citizyn like myself trying to drag you back to reality and away from your delusional conservatard fantasies as "trolling" illustrates just how out of touch with common sense and the real world you are.

Your response to the truth is literally "Nah, has to be a troll." Unbelievable.

You are a lying troll. I can spot truth and sincerity. Everyone and their dog knows that the NYT has a pro democrat (liberal) agenda.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

LM: You came here to troll and spoonfeed us a load of garbage. I don't care if you call NYT 'liberal' by whatever standard you have. But they are basically a propaganda wing of the Democrat party, who is the more liberal party. If you try to sell us less; just save your breath.

The fact that you see an honest, objective citizyn like myself trying to drag you back to reality and away from your delusional conservatard fantasies as "trolling" illustrates just how out of touch with common sense and the real world you are.

Your response to the truth is literally "Nah, has to be a troll." Unbelievable.

you are nothing but a blind, partisan hard-left SHEEP. if you had an ounce of shame you would avoid this particular thread like the plague; since you are a laughingstock of liberal HYPOCRISY.
how can you even begin to defend the blatant hypocrisy of the New York Times payinga woman less than a man FOR THE SAME JOB; given their rantings bout just that on their political pages and editorial pages?

unless of course YOU RE A BLIND HYPOCRITE CONDITIONED to project your failed ideology onto others

Did he "even begin" to defend the NYT? I think he was too busy throwing out deflections like a putz.

 

[LiberalMedia]

You amuse me...I mean you REALLY amuse me! The New York Times is a conservative paper? MSNBC "usually" has a liberal slant? The Huffington Post is mostly moderate? Think Progress leans "slightly" to the left?

Do you not grasp that I was mocking you when I mentioned those other liberal media outlets? The fact that you DON'T see those four organizations as fervently liberal in their outlook blows my mind. The New York Times ITSELF admits that it has a liberal bias! MSNBC is SO slanted to the left that "usually" doesn't apply...the word you're looking for would be "steadfastly". The Huffington Post is well known for pushing a liberal agenda and has been proudly doing so for well over a decade. If Think Progress leaned any FURTHER to the left it would standing on it's head.

So my question for you is this...are you being deliberately obtuse...or are you really this unaware of reality?

First, HuffPo isn't the raging liberal organization you're trying to make it out to be. They have articles on explicitly conservatard issues, such as Tea Party victories, a push for celibacy until marriage, Edward 'I Love America' Snowden (this one is hosted on Wired, but is linked to by HuffPo on their Tech page), telling people to eat unhealthy food all they want because it's their choice no matter what First Lady Michelle Obama says, why it's bad to drink your own urine, and why political correctness is bad and why you should devote specific attention to a person's race in any situation no matter what. So before you embark on yet another rant about how every media organization ever is run by evil librulls out to get you, review those HuffPo articles and open your eyes to the raging conservatard influence in the media.

Second, I notice that you dedicated your entire post to a pretentious "You believe WHAT! I can't BELIEVE it! You're CRAZY! How can you THINK that!" tirade and have failed address the challenge I posed to you. If you really think that the NYT is a liberal organization "playing the 'do as I say...not as I do' game" (in your own words), then find me an article on the issue of gender inequality written by the chauvinist that paid Abramson less. This is the only way to prove a double standard and, if you cannot fulfill it in your next post, I will assume that you are silently admitting defeat and declaring the NYT to be a fair and balanced media outlet with outstanding, unbiased coverage and absolutely no double standards.

First of all the man who fired Abramson is the publisher, Arthur Salzberger Jr.. He runs the paper...he doesn't write for the paper.

Translation: "I admit that I cannot produce a single shred of evidence that the NYT is being in any way hypocritical, because the views expressed in the NYT and the personnel decisions made by the NYT are made by entirely separate people. I also confess that I am a complete retard devoid of any reason whatsoever and should stop posting my bigoted views and devote the rest of my life to checking my overwhelming white privilege."

Another liberal victory. Suck it, fascists.

 

[longknife]

And a report today says that, with bonuses, The ***** earned more than any other editor-in-chief!!!

More Libtard BS all throughout this thread.

 

[LiberalMedia]

LM: You came here to troll and spoonfeed us a load of garbage. I don't care if you call NYT 'liberal' by whatever standard you have. But they are basically a propaganda wing of the Democrat party, who is the more liberal party. If you try to sell us less; just save your breath.

The fact that you see an honest, objective citizyn like myself trying to drag you back to reality and away from your delusional conservatard fantasies as "trolling" illustrates just how out of touch with common sense and the real world you are.

Your response to the truth is literally "Nah, has to be a troll." Unbelievable.

You are a lying troll. I can spot truth and sincerity. Everyone and their dog knows that the NYT has a pro democrat (liberal) agenda.

Really? "You're a liar because I say so. Also, dogs have an in-depth knowledge of the U.S. political system, again because I say so. You should take all of this in good faith and stop asking questions." That's your argument?

Conservatards are getting worse and worse in their blatant denial of reality. There needs to be a law written banning this.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

And a report today says that, with bonuses, The ***** earned more than any other editor-in-chief!!!

More Libtard BS all throughout this thread.

Huh? If true; that'd make her the *****; not the NYT. I mean LM poster would still be a loser for lying to us about the political vent of the paper. But the NYT would not be hypocrites in that scenario.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

The fact that you see an honest, objective citizyn like myself trying to drag you back to reality and away from your delusional conservatard fantasies as "trolling" illustrates just how out of touch with common sense and the real world you are.

Your response to the truth is literally "Nah, has to be a troll." Unbelievable.

You are a lying troll. I can spot truth and sincerity. Everyone and their dog knows that the NYT has a pro democrat (liberal) agenda.

Really? "You're a liar because I say so. Also, dogs have an in-depth knowledge of the U.S. political system, again because I say so. You should take all of this in good faith and stop asking questions." That's your argument?

Conservatards are getting worse and worse in their blatant denial of reality. There needs to be a law written banning this.

You're a negative value. Liars always are.

 

[Papageorgio]

They are just following the current administrations policy. It's no big deal for hypocritical liberals.


Sent from my iPad using an Android.

 

[Oldstyle]

First, HuffPo isn't the raging liberal organization you're trying to make it out to be. They have articles on explicitly conservatard issues, such as Tea Party victories, a push for celibacy until marriage, Edward 'I Love America' Snowden (this one is hosted on Wired, but is linked to by HuffPo on their Tech page), telling people to eat unhealthy food all they want because it's their choice no matter what First Lady Michelle Obama says, why it's bad to drink your own urine, and why political correctness is bad and why you should devote specific attention to a person's race in any situation no matter what. So before you embark on yet another rant about how every media organization ever is run by evil librulls out to get you, review those HuffPo articles and open your eyes to the raging conservatard influence in the media.

Second, I notice that you dedicated your entire post to a pretentious "You believe WHAT! I can't BELIEVE it! You're CRAZY! How can you THINK that!" tirade and have failed address the challenge I posed to you. If you really think that the NYT is a liberal organization "playing the 'do as I say...not as I do' game" (in your own words), then find me an article on the issue of gender inequality written by the chauvinist that paid Abramson less. This is the only way to prove a double standard and, if you cannot fulfill it in your next post, I will assume that you are silently admitting defeat and declaring the NYT to be a fair and balanced media outlet with outstanding, unbiased coverage and absolutely no double standards.

First of all the man who fired Abramson is the publisher, Arthur Salzberger Jr.. He runs the paper...he doesn't write for the paper.

Translation: "I admit that I cannot produce a single shred of evidence that the NYT is being in any way hypocritical, because the views expressed in the NYT and the personnel decisions made by the NYT are made by entirely separate people. I also confess that I am a complete retard devoid of any reason whatsoever and should stop posting my bigoted views and devote the rest of my life to checking my overwhelming white privilege."

Another liberal victory. Suck it, fascists.

So let me get this straight? In your naive little mind the publisher of the New York Times has no control over the content of the paper? Is THAT your contention? I hate to bring cold reality into your world but Salzberger runs that newspaper and the Editor in Chief answers to him.

I notice that you don't have a response to either of my pieces from the NYT after DEMANDING that they be given to you! Instead, you've declared yourself the "victor"? Care to comment on the NYT's editorial that loudly TRUMPETS it's liberal bias? Or are your debating skills limited to calling people retards, facists and playing the race card?

 

[LiberalMedia]

The following article is FROM the New York Times. It makes your claim that they are a conservative paper laughable.

THE PUBLIC EDITOR - Is The New York Times a Liberal Newspaper? - NYTimes.com

They not only admit it...they PROUDLY admit it!

"They"? Who is "they"?

By DANIEL OKRENT
Published: July 25, 2004

Oh right, "they" are really "him," and "is" is really "was". So here's a list of hardline conservatard articles from multiple authors, all published on May 24, 2014--yesterday.


NYT advocates for using Hispanic-American immigrants as slave labor
NYT joins the GOP in bashing Russia's annexation of Crimea
NYT shills for Jeb Bush's 2016 presidential run
NYT lauds corporations taking over pot industry

Read these and tell me that the New York Times is liberal. Go on, do it. And when you do, cite multiple quotes from each article or you're admitting to the world that you're full of shit.