The right, which sees the New York Times as an organ for the Democratic Party, is having a schadenfreude shindig over the unceremonious firing of the paper’s first female executive editor, Jill Abramson, particularly as details on the discrepancy in pay between her and her predecessor comes out. It’s akin to the way the Republicans reacted when they learned that Sen. Mark Begich, who was a vocal supporter of equal pay laws, paid his female staffers less than his male staffers.
From the New Yorker about the pay differential:
As executive editor, Abramson’s starting salary in 2011 was $475,000, compared to Keller’s salary that year, $559,000. Her salary was raised to $503,000, and—only after she protested—was raised again to $525,000. She learned that her salary as managing editor, $398,000, was less than that of the male managing editor for news operations, John Geddes. She also learned that her salary as Washington bureau chief, from 2000 to 2003, was a hundred thousand dollars less than that of her successor in that position, Phil Taubman.