Miller Negotiating Terms of Potential Departure

[cassiepriam]

http://www.observer.com/themediamob/2005/10/miller-negotiating-terms-of-potential.html


<<<Reporter Judith Miller and The New York Times are in negotiations over the terms under which she would possibly agree to leave the paper.

According to a source familiar with the discussions, there are three issues on the table. The first is how much severance Miller would receive, the second concerns whether she will be given space on the Op-Ed page to answer critics and the third is whether the Times and Miller will issue a joint statement defining the terms of her departure.

Multiple sources sympathetic to Miller’s case said they did not anticipate Miller leaving until her conditions were met. “The sense I have is that it’s not a question of dismissing her. If she won’t go, she won’t go,” said one source.>>>


--Anna Schneider-Mayerson and Gabriel Sherman

[Loonman]

1. Easy: collar and belt carry...

...heave her right out the door onto the sidewalk.

[DoYouEverWonder]

3. I was hoping for another perp walk

this time a real one with cops and handcuffs and the whole nine yards.

[endarkenment]

2. That reminds me.

yesterday somebody posted a photo of judy's swanky downtown condo building - my guess is that she sets up there for a cool 3M or so plus a major league monthly condo fee. Now I know that she is/was a top reporter an the New York Swine, but what exactly does a top reporter pull down and how exactly does that match up with that swanky condo and hefty rent?

I'd love to know whats on her 1040.

[Garbo 2004]

8. Judy married older and well. Jason Epstein. Retired publisher.

An article from a few years ago: http://www.college.columbia.edu/cct/may01/may01_profile_epstein.html

Seems like an interesting guy.

Judy told the court, among other things, she couldn't go to jail because her hubby was old, in ill health and needed her to take care of him. Poor dear. Like she had to change his nappies or something (yeah, Judy as Florence Nightingale and 1st Amendment heroine). But to the slammer she went. So she bought a wee little dog to keep the poor old guy company. So while she's in the slammer, her hubby goes off on a Mediterranean cruise vacation. (Don't know if he took the dog or not.) LOL
http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/331819p-283554c.html

[Warren Stupidity]

22. Ah... ok so she is a complete and total whore

in all aspects of her life. Got it. Thanks for filling in the background.

[kenny blankenship]

4. NYTimes is such a joke

just FIRE her worthless ass! She's acted in breach of good faith with the paper and its readers (unless what they really want is propaganda and agitation on behalf of foreign interests). The paper backed her up and gave her the benefit of the doubt; she took a giant crap on their trust.

Any paper with integrity would kick her butt out the door so fast her nose would bleed.

[Lex]

5. "If she won’t go, she won’t go" ????

How about security taking her to the sidewalk?

And taking back her pass or whatever gets her into the building?

[cassiepriam]

6. NYT can't fire her, and she is going to sue if her terms aren't met.

According to this auricle, Miller is protected by the Newspaper Guild’s contract with the paper. The contract limits the paper’s ability to fire employees at will.

And Miller says she "will not leave under these circumstances, not in a defamatory atmosphere.”

A sidebar question: If reporters are so darn protected, why are they so afraid to print the truth?? Looks like they cannot be fired under any circumstance. So why are they so afraid?

[kenny blankenship]

10. this would be "for cause", not at will termination.

dragging your paper's name in the sewer is not acceptable behavior in an employee--if that's what she is.
The defamatory atmosphere is one SHE created herself and it's currently raining shit down on what's left of her employer's good name. Let her sue. All the while stuff will be coming out about the investigation and indictments of her playmates. After the paper has had to backpeddle on her blatant lying and warmongering, and then it (still) went to the wall for her "journalistic integrity" shielding her against the govt., trusting blindly that she was protecting a legitimate source of information--oh hell yeah let the bitch sue!

[Garbo 2004]

12. Kinda hard to nail Judy on that when they were entirely complicit

and apparently didn't undertake due diligence to cover their own butts. She's been a shitty reporter in bed (at least metaphorically) with her sources for years and they applauded her. She's gone far over the journalistic line over and over and they put her on the front page.

She was involved, possibly as a subject, in a fed investigation involving a tip off to an organization under fed investigation. (A previous Fitz case.) She was involved in the Libby/Plame thing and they backed her to the hilt. They had op eds full of praise for their homegrown heroine.

Now if they want to fire her for cause, it would be a cause they aided, abetted and supported. Oh yeah, she's got 'em by the shorts rather than vice versa. And no doubt she'll sue if she doesn't get everything she wants.

It's delicious.

[cassiepriam]

18. I agree, but that is not how she is playing it. Talk about B*lls.

[FourStarDemocrat]

21. The Times is ridiculous.

They should just let her sue them then, what are they worried about?

She lied to editors, she disobeyed editors' instructions. They have more than enough of a case to make to get rid of her. If they make any deal with her they will continue to be the laughing stock of the publishing world.

[Zenlitened]

7. NYT stock closes at 52-week low of 26.65

Maybe it's declining ad revenue, or paid circulation. The cost of ink. Maybe.

But the tremendous suckage of the editorial side of things certainly can't be helping matters.

:eyes:

http://chart.bigcharts.com/custom/barrons-com/quote-chart-gq.img?style=1881&size=1&freq=1hr&symb=US-NYT&time=1yr

[GreenPartyVoter]

9. Er.. why negotiate? Just fire her arse!

---------------------------------------------------------------
Tired of nutty in your face fundies? Me too!
http://www.livejournal.com/community/thought_express/14905.html

[Garbo 2004]

11. If it were that easy to fire her by now they likely would. The article,

like others that have appeared, suggests why that likely is not possible. Hence the negotiation.

Hey, they knew their Judy. Did they really think she would go along quietly? Heh. And she wants to use their own op ed section to trash her critics, including no doubt Keller, Dowd, anyone at the Times who ever looked sideways at her, Kurtz, Ariana, probably even the doorman who wasn't quick enough to open the door for her. LOL!

NYT nurtured and built up this monster, now it turns on them. Unsuprising but poetic. Like Aspen leaves, as it were. LOL

[GreenPartyVoter]

14. It's either a contract deal or she's got dirt on a lot of higher-ups... or

both.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Tired of nutty in your face fundies? Me too!
http://www.livejournal.com/community/thought_express/14905.html

[cassiepriam]

19. My thoughts exactly. It is both.

[Jacobin]

15. Those were my thoughts exactly

WTF is to negotiate?

Here's the door. Get your silly ass OUT

[Nikki Stone1]

13. Give her a bus token and 3 bucks for a latte. (And THAT would be a gift)

Worthless bitch.

[SoCalDem]

16. Just reassign her and edit the hell out of her stuff

Make her miserable until Fox offers her a show or regnery , a book deal..

They can assign other reporters to do "indepth" articles ABOUT the 'scandal'..impossible to keep HER out of the stories..

ot they can just pay her off and say Buh-byeee

[meganmonkey]

17. Honestly, the NYT deserves every bit of it

They fucked up too, and they need to get called out for it. As others above have pointed out, if they call her incompetent they are admitting their own incompetence. So they can't do that. But they sure as hell should.

Ultimately I am on the NYT side, simply because we need a good paper and this scandal might force them to clean up their act. We can be pretty sure that they will never be a RW-talking point babbler again - despite their reputation among those who don't ever read it anyway, they have been a lazy ass bushco-enabling piece of shit for years. I hope their editor gets canned and there is a big shake up. And then maybe the NYT can re-emerge as a responsible paper that takes chances for TRUTH rather than LIES. Miller needs to get booted the hell out of there and the NYT needs to start over and shine as an investigative, truth-seeking force in the world of information.

Wishful thinking? Yeah, I know...

:shrug:

[cassiepriam]

20. karma time for NYT