Jill Abramson's Firing Was About Gender. And Also Not About Gender.

Are We Asking The Wrong Questions About Gender At Work?
Jill Abramson, executive editor of The New York Times, listens during a panel discussion on the sidelines of the Republican National Convention (RNC) in Tampa, Florida, U.S., on Sunday, Aug. 26, 2012. The discussion, held across the river from the Republican National Convention, was sponsored by Bloomberg, the University of Southern Californiaâs Annenberg Center on Communication, Leadership and Policy and the Institute of Politics at Harvard Universityâs John F. Kennedy School of Government. Photographer: Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg via Getty Images
Jill Abramson, executive editor of The New York Times, listens during a panel discussion on the sidelines of the Republican National Convention (RNC) in Tampa, Florida, U.S., on Sunday, Aug. 26, 2012. The discussion, held across the river from the Republican National Convention, was sponsored by Bloomberg, the University of Southern Californiaâs Annenberg Center on Communication, Leadership and Policy and the Institute of Politics at Harvard Universityâs John F. Kennedy School of Government. Photographer: Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg via Getty Images

When it comes to identity politics in America, we’re always asking the wrong questions. It happened when people talked about Hillary Clinton’s campaign for President of the United States. It happened when people talked about Christine Quinn’s run for Mayor of New York. And it’s been happening, more or less non-stop, as critics and reporters perform forensics on Jill Abramson’s 32 months as executive editor of The New York Times.

The stories are different, but the template remains the same. It’s one we developed in 2008, when Clinton couldn’t lose until she lost. In the wake of her exit from the race, the media erupted in stories that seemed to pivot on one simple question: Did Hillary lose because of sexism?

Popular in the Community

Close

What's Hot