Community Chat

[AngusandBuddhasMom]

On 5/15/2014 terrier3 said:

On 5/15/2014 Caravaggio said:

On 5/15/2014 terrier3 said:

On 5/15/2014 scotttie said:

On 5/15/2014 Caravaggio said:

Wow how ironic- A newspaper that bashes others over glass ceiling ethics get's caught red handed..

Extra extra read all about it!

At least they are reporting on abuses...I give them more credit that papers that pretend there isn't a problem!

You give credit to a paper that held back a supposed valued and qualified female editor. You can't have it both ways.

Is it that hard to admit that they F'd up and tried to hide this.

I still think that the NYT is the best paper I have ever read. I have learned a lot about many things happening in the world never covered anywhere else. Paper can cover stories in-depth, unlike the evening news or even cable news.

Their HR practices are a totally different matter and have nothing to do with the content of their reporting.

I am interested to find out the true story.

Not denying there ability to tell a story. I myself read more from overseas then here to get a different point of view.

[pinkskates4]

On 5/15/2014 terrier3 said:

On 5/15/2014 Caravaggio said:

On 5/15/2014 terrier3 said:

On 5/15/2014 scotttie said:

On 5/15/2014 Caravaggio said:

Wow how ironic- A newspaper that bashes others over glass ceiling ethics get's caught red handed..

Extra extra read all about it!

At least they are reporting on abuses...I give them more credit that papers that pretend there isn't a problem!

You give credit to a paper that held back a supposed valued and qualified female editor. You can't have it both ways.

Is it that hard to admit that they F'd up and tried to hide this.

I still think that the NYT is the best paper I have ever read. I have learned a lot about many things happening in the world never covered anywhere else. Paper can cover stories in-depth, unlike the evening news or even cable news.

Their HR practices are a totally different matter and have nothing to do with the content of their reporting.

I am interested to find out the true story.

So it's perfectly OK for them to discriminate against women - as long as they are against other people doing it?

[terrier3]

On 5/15/2014 Dagna said:

So it's perfectly OK for them to discriminate against women - as long as they are against other people doing it?

Dagna - It's not OK. That is why I started this post.

But there is a "wall" in any news organization between the editorial staff (story writers) and the business side of the company. Business doesn't tell editorial what to do and visa versa.

Example: I had a large PI attorney as an advertising client. One of the partners got reprimanded by the bar and suspended for 6 months. The news channel covered the story. I couldn't tell them what to do or to go easy on my client, who spent over a million dollars a year with us.

It would be totally UNETHICAL for Abramson to assign a reporter to cover a story regarding her salary disagreements with management.

I don't understand why you cannot comprehend how unethical that would be.

Or maybe you just don't want to comprehend...it doesn't fit your ideology.

[adelle38]

On 5/15/2014 Caravaggio said:

On 5/15/2014 adelle38 said:

On 5/15/2014 occasional rain said:

On 5/15/2014 anisa said:

On 5/15/2014 terrier3 said:

The article has two issues - She recently found out she made less money than the men who had jobs before she did...and that her male assistant made more than she did.

Plus she was considered brisk, demanding, and not overly friendly with her staff.

In other words a beatch. A man acting that way would be considered a go-getter who gets the job done.

No. He would be considered a problem with whom it was hard to work and responsible for the likely loss of talented employees.

Good leaders create an atmosphere where employees feel valued not harassed.

You've obviously never worked in a newsroom. Being demanding is part of an editor's job. Being friendly isn't.

That is understood in any corporate office. The alpha is the backbone and the person running everything behind the scenes. If she could not handle that without coming off as a pushy B then she could not handle that. The fact that she took a job "thinking" she was making more then others without finding out first makes me question her skill set.

Salaries are a confidential human resource matter. How would she find out legally unless her predecessor told her?

[pinkskates4]

On 5/15/2014 terrier3 said:

On 5/15/2014 Dagna said:

So it's perfectly OK for them to discriminate against women - as long as they are against other people doing it?

Dagna - It's not OK. That is why I started this post.

But there is a "wall" in any news organization between the editorial staff (story writers) and the business side of the company. Business doesn't tell editorial what to do and visa versa.

Example: I had a large PI attorney as an advertising client. One of the partners got reprimanded by the bar and suspended for 6 months. The news channel covered the story. I couldn't tell them what to do or to go easy on my client, who spent over a million dollars a year with us.

It would be totally UNETHICAL for Abramson to assign a reporter to cover a story regarding her salary disagreements with management.

I don't understand why you cannot comprehend how unethical that would be.

Or maybe you just don't want to comprehend...it doesn't fit your ideology.

I think you are deliberately not understanding my point.

The NYT - its owners and publishers - were quite content to have their paper report on pay inequality for women done by OTHERS - while they were also quite content to discriminate against women themselves.

THAT is hypocritical and unethical in my book.

[tansy]

On 5/15/2014 adelle38 said:

On 5/15/2014 Caravaggio said:

On 5/15/2014 adelle38 said:

On 5/15/2014 occasional rain said:

On 5/15/2014 anisa said:

On 5/15/2014 terrier3 said:

The article has two issues - She recently found out she made less money than the men who had jobs before she did...and that her male assistant made more than she did.

Plus she was considered brisk, demanding, and not overly friendly with her staff.

In other words a beatch. A man acting that way would be considered a go-getter who gets the job done.

No. He would be considered a problem with whom it was hard to work and responsible for the likely loss of talented employees.

Good leaders create an atmosphere where employees feel valued not harassed.

You've obviously never worked in a newsroom. Being demanding is part of an editor's job. Being friendly isn't.

That is understood in any corporate office. The alpha is the backbone and the person running everything behind the scenes. If she could not handle that without coming off as a pushy B then she could not handle that. The fact that she took a job "thinking" she was making more then others without finding out first makes me question her skill set.

Salaries are a confidential human resource matter. How would she find out legally unless her predecessor told her?

At this level wouldn't most people have an agent to represent their interests?

[adelle38]

On 5/15/2014 Dagna said:

On 5/15/2014 terrier3 said:

On 5/15/2014 Dagna said:

So it's perfectly OK for them to discriminate against women - as long as they are against other people doing it?

Dagna - It's not OK. That is why I started this post.

But there is a "wall" in any news organization between the editorial staff (story writers) and the business side of the company. Business doesn't tell editorial what to do and visa versa.

Example: I had a large PI attorney as an advertising client. One of the partners got reprimanded by the bar and suspended for 6 months. The news channel covered the story. I couldn't tell them what to do or to go easy on my client, who spent over a million dollars a year with us.

It would be totally UNETHICAL for Abramson to assign a reporter to cover a story regarding her salary disagreements with management.

I don't understand why you cannot comprehend how unethical that would be.

Or maybe you just don't want to comprehend...it doesn't fit your ideology.

I think you are deliberately not understanding my point.

The NYT - its owners and publishers - were quite content to have their paper report on pay inequality for women done by OTHERS - while they were also quite content to discriminate against women themselves.

THAT is hypocritical and unethical in my book.

The structure of newspapers is such that the editorial division is entirely separate from the business side. Newspaper publishers, regardless of the staff, are usually very conservative. Does it excuse pay inequality? Of course not. By the way, the Times is denying these allegations of pay discrimination.

[pinkskates4]

On 5/15/2014 adelle38 said:

On 5/15/2014 Dagna said:

On 5/15/2014 terrier3 said:

On 5/15/2014 Dagna said:

So it's perfectly OK for them to discriminate against women - as long as they are against other people doing it?

Dagna - It's not OK. That is why I started this post.

But there is a "wall" in any news organization between the editorial staff (story writers) and the business side of the company. Business doesn't tell editorial what to do and visa versa.

Example: I had a large PI attorney as an advertising client. One of the partners got reprimanded by the bar and suspended for 6 months. The news channel covered the story. I couldn't tell them what to do or to go easy on my client, who spent over a million dollars a year with us.

It would be totally UNETHICAL for Abramson to assign a reporter to cover a story regarding her salary disagreements with management.

I don't understand why you cannot comprehend how unethical that would be.

Or maybe you just don't want to comprehend...it doesn't fit your ideology.

I think you are deliberately not understanding my point.

The NYT - its owners and publishers - were quite content to have their paper report on pay inequality for women done by OTHERS - while they were also quite content to discriminate against women themselves.

THAT is hypocritical and unethical in my book.

The structure of newspapers is such that the editorial division is entirely separate from the business side. Newspaper publishers, regardless of the staff, are usually very conservative. Does it excuse pay inequality? Of course not. By the way, the Times is denying these allegations of pay discrimination.

Well of course they are. It's not only hypocritical in their case, it is also illegal.

[terrier3]

Dagna -

It is unethical to report on your own company.

Pay inequality and gender discrimination are widespread problems in America...of course the #1 newspaper in America would report on it. They have a public editor, Margaret Sullivan, who has a column on the paper...that is a unique position - most papers have gotten rid of their public editors.

Meanwhile, they are denying the claims. I guess it may play out in court, or maybe not.

You obviously have never worked in the news business and refuse to learn how a newsroom functions.

Too bad...

[pinkskates4]

On 5/15/2014 terrier3 said:

Dagna -

It is unethical to report on your own company.

Pay inequality and gender discrimination are widespread problems in America...of course the #1 newspaper in America would report on it. They have a public editor, Margaret Sullivan, who has a column on the paper...that is a unique position - most papers have gotten rid of their public editors.

Meanwhile, they are denying the claims. I guess it may play out in court, or maybe not.

You obviously have never worked in the news business and refuse to learn how a newsroom functions.

Too bad...

OK then I await other papers/reporters who have also reported upon and lectured all of us about pay discrimination to get to the bottom of the NYT situation.

How long do you think that will take?