Skip to main content

Jill Abramson, a managing editor, will replace current Executive Editor Bill Keller. The move is effective September 6th.  

NEW YORK -- The executive editor of The New York Times is stepping down after eight years on the job.

The Times announced Thursday that Bill Keller is leaving the post to return to writing. He will be replaced by Jill Abramson, formerly one of his top deputies. She will become the first woman to hold that job at the paper.

Times Publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. says in a statement that Keller asked for the change a few weeks ago. Keller plans to write for The New York Times Magazine and the paper's Sunday opinion and news section.

Abramson was the paper's managing editor.

The newspaper said the changes are effective Sept. 6.

From Jill Abramson's Wikipedia page:

A native of New York City, Abramson received her high school diploma from Ethical Culture Fieldston School and a B.A. in History and Literature from Harvard University in 1976.[2] While a student at Harvard, she worked at Time magazine from 1973 to 1976 and subsequently spent nearly a decade as a senior staff reporter for The American Lawyer. In 1986, she was appointed as editor in chief of Legal Times in Washington, D.C., serving for two years. From 1988 to 1997, she was a senior reporter in the Washington bureau of The Wall Street Journal, eventually rising to deputy bureau chief. She became the chief of The New York Times Washington bureau upon her move to the newspaper in 1997.

Abramson was The Times' Washington Bureau chief during the turbulent period of spring, 2003 during the run-up to the war in Iraq and the Jayson Blair scandal, which led to the resignation of Executive Editor Howell Raines and Managing Editor Gerald Boyd. Abramson was named to the news Managing Editor position (with co-Managing Editor John M.Geddes) by Raines' successor Bill Keller.[3]

In 1995, Abramson and her Wall Street Journal colleague (and Fieldston alumna) Jane Mayer co-authored Strange Justice: The Selling of Clarence Thomas, which detailed circumstances surrounding the confirmation hearings of Justice Clarence Thomas. Maureen Dowd would later write of having bonded with Abramson during that time.[4] From 2000–01, she was a professor at Princeton University.[2] She was elected a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2001.[5]

On February 13, 2007, Abramson testified in the perjury trial of Scooter Libby, United States v. Libby. She was called as a defense witness to undercut the credibility of Judith Miller.


EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (5+ / 0-)

    "I'm sculpting now. Landscapes mostly." ~ Yogi Bear

    by eXtina on Thu Jun 02, 2011 at 10:17:27 AM PDT

  •  Finally. One more chip in that glass ceiling. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    eXtina, Ed Tracey, 4Freedom

    Anyone who argues that we've moved past sexism (or that white men are oppressed in this country) doesn't have their eyes open.

  •  I thought I recognized her name .... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    eXtina, 4Freedom

    ...from that book with Jane Mayer. And doesn't that last sentence speak volumes about this person?

    She was called as a defense witness to undercut the credibility of Judith Miller.

    "We should pay attention to that man behind the curtain."

    by Ed Tracey on Thu Jun 02, 2011 at 12:09:37 PM PDT

  •  Whew! I had unsubscribed to my NYT feeds after (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    eXtina

    I read how the Times led with Weiner on the FP yesterday.

    Ms. Abramson will have better taste than that. Maybe I'll resume my subscription after she settles in.

  •  A Margaret Thatcher type breakthrough? (0+ / 0-)

    I hope this is not a "Margaret Thatcher" type breakthrough... a strong exception on the wrong side rather than a trendsetter opening up opportunities for more women.

    A Harvard graduate she has a very strong career track but with mixed messages on viewpoint when the details are examined.

    She has been the previous Exec Ed's, Keller's deputy and was brought in by him. Those Wikipedia quotes above are not encouraging... to repeat them:

    "....Keller, who marched in lockstep with the Bush administration during the buildup to the Iraq war. He took Judith Miller at her word and actually wrote recently that the press should not have an adversarial relationship with government."
    "From 1988 to 1997, she was a senior reporter in the Washington bureau of The Wall Street Journal, eventually rising to deputy bureau chief. She became the chief of The New York Times Washington bureau upon her move to the newspaper in 1997."

    "Abramson was The Times' Washington Bureau chief during the turbulent period of spring, 2003 during the run-up to the war in Iraq and the Jayson Blair scandal, which led to the resignation of Executive Editor Howell Raines and Managing Editor Gerald Boyd. Abramson was named to the news Managing Editor position (with co-Managing Editor John M.Geddes) by Raines' successor Bill Keller.[3]"

    And yeah, she co-authored a book "the Selling of Clarence Thomas" so clearly can take on the more egregious abuses of the system...
    But also the killer Wikipedia quote as above:

    "On February 13, 2007, Abramson testified in the perjury trial of Scooter Libby, United States v. Libby. She was called as a defense witness to undercut the credibility of Judith Miller."

    Hostile witness? it does not say. Bonded with Maureen Dowd... Just how hard core is she? As a women in that environment she has to be good, very good, better than the men just to be taken seriously and accepted probably... and as hard and ruthless when needed... maybe more than her male colleagues at times.

    Mixed messages about her own agenda from her career... but will the board and owners allow her to be her own person? Or has she already made compromises she is comfortable with and they know who and what they are getting? Her track record suggests she has been an enabler of the great and not so good at least some of the time. The Wall Street Journal has been and still is a news organization respected for accuracy then and now. But naturally conservative all along when she was deputy DC bureau chief for them and now. When she was there the editorial page was apolitical compared to the current Murdoch ownership environment. But all the same, was her time there strictly as a respected professional or one who would be "acceptable" to the movers and shakers? She certainly would have met and got to have known just about ALL of them in that role and must be at least acceptable to some if not most of them...

    For anyone who has hated the NYT as a bastion of liberal viewpoints and who have not noticed its slow but steady move to the middle and even the right, an Exec Ed who continues or even accelerates this trend is welcome but to others who note that the almost entirely conservative-owned media has not been "left-wing" for quite a while, this is just another step towards a Berlusconi-style monopoly of viewpoint in the media. The NYT times led with the Rep Weiner twitter hoax in the best traditions of the sensationalist press it seems to need to follow. Is this a sign of things to come at the NYT? Survival as a paper transitioning to electronic fending off potential rivals like Daily Beast or Huff post to claim the big middle and even influence it to move in the direction it favors?

    The NYT has been trending towards the politics of supporting the well-being of the well-off for quite a while... Just as the owners of the Washington Post have gone rightwards intentionally in part to court the reality that readership is older and more conservative and partly to take business away from the Washington Times (the conservative Moonie owned paper) importantly the WaPo owners are personally much more conservative than previously. (Katherine Graham is spinning!)

    So too, the NYT seems to be doing a similar evolution. Even while still reviled as "liberal" it has been edging rightwards for many years... Is she independently minded? Open to all ideas and able to go ahead with hard hitting journalism that grants no favors? Or will she be amenable to shape the news to suit the powerful and influential? Rupert Murdoch style news has infected the entire news landscape. Has it reached a high water mark and the public will increasingly demand substance and truth? Will papers become irrelevant anyway and the on-line incarnations  take over entirely even sooner than predicted? Maybe taking over a shrinking, sinking media outlet now is an irrelevancy.

    I have my fingers crossed. This is not an easy time for anyone in the news biz... the bottom line rules more than ever and yet over in Murdoch-land losses are allowed if it subsidizes political goals.... Who knows what the owners of the NYT want? Will Jill be a patsy, a tool, a titan or a maverick? A transition figure in the decline of print or a keen navigator who will make the best of what could or would otherwise be a bad bargain?

    Pogo & Murphy's Law, every time. Also "Trust but verify" - St. Ronnie (hah...)

    by IreGyre on Fri Jun 03, 2011 at 03:40:02 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site