

The issue wasn’t whether it would be a “tough story”. Kantor’s email is completely at odds with the story that ran.
As for Bo Olson, how could the Times have “known his status was contested” when they didn’t bother asking?
Amazon 1, Baquet 0
It seems obvious Olson is lying to you, and you’re fine with that because it means you can “stand by your story” which every editor in history does at almost all costs. Must stand by those stories, retracting is bad for business, bad for the brand.
I sadly agree that this is a common, broader problem.
While I was working for a dot.com firm I was told 2 years in a row that my work had been great but I wasn’t being promoted because I had had or was going to have a maternity leave (2 kids 18 months apart). My successful husband chose to be the stay-at-home Dad so that I…