New chief at the New York Times

The New York Times unexpectedly ousted Executive Editor Jill Abramson, naming Dean Baquet to the top job. The move takes the top female in charge out of her job after less than three years and puts in the first African-American in the role.

Bloomberg Businessweek had these details in a story by Edmund Lee:

Baquet, 57, previously the newspaper’s managing editor, takes over immediately, the Times said today in a statement. Baquet becomes the first African-American executive editor in the newspaper’s 162-year history.

Her short tenure as the newspaper’s first female editor was marked by controversy over her management style and clashes with senior executives over initiatives such as native advertising, which are online ads designed to resemble news articles.

Arthur Sulzberger Jr., the publisher and chairman of the company, said in a staff meeting that he chose to make the change because he thought new leadership would improve some aspects of the management of the newsroom, according to a person who attended the meeting.

Abramson’s ouster was a shock to many at the Times, according to four people who were present. Many applauded the appointment of Baquet, who is seen as a dogged defender of newsroom policies and is well liked by reporters who have worked directly with him.

The New York Times story called the newsroom “stunned” in a piece by David Carr and Ravi Somaiya:

Arthur O. Sulzberger Jr., the publisher of the paper and the chairman of The New York Times Company, told a stunned newsroom that had been quickly assembled that he had made the decision because of “an issue with management in the newsroom.”

Ms. Abramson, 60, had been in the job only since September 2011. But people in the company briefed on the situation described serious tension in her relationship with Mr. Sulzberger, who had been hearing concerns from employees that she was polarizing and mercurial. They had disagreements even before she was appointed executive editor, and she had also had clashes with Mr. Baquet.

In recent weeks, people briefed on the situation said, Mr. Baquet had become angered over a decision by Ms. Abramson to try to hire an editor from The Guardian, Janine Gibson, and install her alongside him a co-managing editor position without consulting him. It escalated the conflict between them and rose to the attention of Mr. Sulzberger.

Ms. Abramson had recently engaged a consultant to help her with her management style. Mr. Sulzberger nevertheless made the decision earlier this month to dismiss her, and last Thursday he informed Mr. Baquet of his promotion, according to the people briefed on the situation, who declined to speak for attribution because of the sensitivity of the matter.

New York magazine reported in a story by Joe Coscarelli that Abramson had been fighting with Times CEO Mark Thompson about allocating scarce resources:

But Sulzberger, in his speech to the newsroom, denied a struggle with the business side was at play. “I chose to appoint a new leader for our newsroom because I believe that new leadership will improve some aspects of the management of the newsroom,” he said, according to former Times media reporter Brian Stelter. “There is nothing more at issue here.” Sulzberger said the quality of journalism under her tenure was not the issue. “This is also NOT about any sort of disagreement between the newsroom and the business side,” he added.

That explanation by process of elimination, while vague, could potentially square with previous reporting on the inner workings of the Abramson era by Politico’s Dylan Byers, who was the first outside reporter to break the news of her departure. (His report today states that Abramson was “abruptly fired.”)

In April of 2013, under the headline “Turbulence at The Times,” Byers wrote that she was “a source of widespread frustration and anxiety within the Times newsroom.”

The Reuters story by Jennifer Saba pointed to pay as a possible motive for the tension at the Times:

Abramson, who was not present at the meeting, did not respond to a request for comment.

Abramson said in a statement, “I’ve loved my run at The Times. I got to work with the best journalists in the world doing so much stand-up journalism.”

The New Yorker reported that Abramson had confronted Times’ executives after she discovered her pay and pension benefits were less than those of Bill Keller, whom she succeeded, citing an unnamed close associate of Abramson. (nyr.kr/1mYSQG6)

In a statement the Times said that Abramson’s “total compensation as executive editor was not considerably less than Keller’s. It was directly comparable.”

The company also said Abramson’s pension benefit is based on her years of service and compensation.

The Times story also pointed out that Baquet was possibly growing frustrated with working for Abramson, who had been criticized for her lack of newsroom management skills. The move points to continued turmoil at the Times. While the news and product isn’t likely to suffer, it is another distraction at a time the paper is fighting for readers in the new online world.