Is Mark Thompson, the CEO of the New York Times, running away from something?
In April, Heat Street reported that two Times employees had launched a civil law suit against Thompson and his colleague, senior executive Meredith Levien.
The claimants – Ernestine Grant, 62, and Marjorie Walker, 61 – have accused Thompson of presiding over “an environment rife with discrimination based on age, race and gender.”
Papers filed in a New York court claim Thompson transplanted “misogynistic and ageist attitudes” from the BBC to the Times when he began working there in 2012.
In May, Heat Street revealed that the Times was supposed to respond to these claims by July 11.
Well that date came and went yesterday – and nothing happened.
Now Elizabeth Chen of Wigdor LLP, the claimants’ lawyer, tells us that the Times has asked the judge for an extension and has been granted one until August 1.
Some regard this as a classic tactic to delay proceedings, but who knows what is behind the dilly-dallying in this case?
Whatever the reason, the fact is that Thompson and the Times are going to have to deal with the claims that have been made against them.
They include the allegation that Thompson’s “tumultuous tenure” at the BBC was “riddled with controversy, given the numerous humiliations and indignities he presided over”.
This triggered concerns from staff at the Times and “external commentators” about his appointment.
The two plaintiffs cite the Jimmy Savile sex abuse scandal, which Thompson was accused of “seemingly [being] involved in attempting to conceal” when he worked at the BBC, as one example of such concerns.
The court papers state: “The New York Times, widely touted as the ‘paper of record’, has been engaging in deplorable discrimination that has remained largely off the record. Unbeknownst to the world at large, not only does the Times have an ideal customer (young, white, wealthy), but also an ideal staffer (young, white, unencumbered with a family) to draw that purported ideal customer.”
The court documents also allege that Ms Levien, Thompson’s first major appointment at the newspaper, made it clear that she wanted to work with “fresh faces”. By that, she meant “younger employees without families, and who were white”, the plaintiffs say.
“Ms Levien’s speech to various [New York Times] personnel also was shockingly rife with racially charged innuendos, such as references to the need for employees to be ‘people who look like the people we are selling to’ and even going so far as to say ‘this isn’t what our sales team should look like’,” they allege.
Today, Elizabeth Chen told Heat Street: “We look forward to litigating this case against the New York Times, Mark Thompson, and Meredith Levien on behalf of our clients, as well the class of advertising staff who have experienced discrimination based on their race, gender, or age to vindicate their rights.”
Heat Street has sent an email to Mark Thompson and is awaiting his response.