The latest explanation coming from the NYT about Jill Abramson’s firing as executive editor is that she deceived owner Arthur Sulzberger. Specifically, Sulzberger believed that Abramson told managing editor Dean Baquet (now Abramson’s successor) that she had offered a job to Janine Gibson to become co-managing editor for the digital side of the paper. But Abramson had told Baquet only that she was thinking about offering Gibson a job and hadn’t told him the job title, which would make Gibson his equal.
Where this story makes no sense to me is the part where Abramson sent Baquet to have lunch with Gibson on May 5, with Gibson already having been offered a co-managing editor position, and Baquet not knowing. Supposedly he found out what was going on from Gibson, complained to Sulzberger, and Abramson got fired.
If Abramson was trying to keep Baquet in the dark, why on earth would she have arranged for him to meet with Gibson? How could she possibly think this would go well for her?