Yesterday, NY Times metro editor Wendell Jamieson resigned his position at the paper after an “internal investigation” revealed…something. HuffPost published an email sent out by the Times to its explain the change to their own newsroom:
After an investigation, Wendell Jamieson has resigned from The Times. Susan Chira is stepping in as interim metro editor effective immediately.
Wendell has asked us to express the following to his colleagues in the newsroom: “Leading Metro for the last five years and working with the incredible Times team has been the high point of my professional life. I regret and apologize for my mistakes and leaving under these circumstances. I’m especially proud of all the talent I’ve helped bring to The Times. Susan Chira is a wonderful editor, a true New Yorker, and I know Metro will rise to even greater heights under her leadership.”
To protect the privacy of those involved, we do not intend to comment further.
Mistakes you say? What kind of mistakes? The Times has decided the sudden exit of a senior figure on its own staff isn’t news. And sure enough the Times’ own story on this says a spokesman refused to tell the paper’s own reporter what it was about, though there is a hint in the final paragraph of the story:
Eileen Murphy, a spokeswoman for The Times, declined to specify the reason that Mr. Jamieson had been investigated…
Last year, The Times investigated another newsroom employee, the prominent political reporter Glenn Thrush, after learning about allegations of inappropriate behavior against him that were later the subject of a report by the website Vox. After a monthlong investigation, Mr. Thrush was suspended without pay. He returned to the newspaper in late January but was moved from the team covering the White House to a beat focused on the country’s social safety net.
Fortunately, not everyone feels bound to protect the reputation of the NY Times. The NY Post reported this:
The New York Times’ Metro editor resigned Monday following an “investigation” involving several women, according to sources…
They didn’t explain what the probe concerned, but sources say it involved women and went on for several weeks.
So this was a MeToo situation likely involving co-workers at the paper. Just two weeks ago the Times won a Pulitzer prize for it’s reporting on Harvey Weinstein which, along with the work of Ronan Farrow for the New Yorker magazine, kick-started the MeToo movement. Yet, when it comes to their own MeToo problem, their concern is privacy? It’s possible the privacy the Times is concerned with here is that of the women involved, not Wendell Jamieson. But wasn’t the idea of MeToo that women were going to come forward and speak up, thereby encouraging others with their example? Isn’t refusing to comment on this incident sort of undercutting that message?