Twitter Slams NYT Decision to Keep Glenn Thrush, Kick Him Off WH Beat: ‘Absolutely Disgraceful’
It was a decision that seemed to please nobody.
Wednesday afternoon, The New York Times announced — after an investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct — that Glenn Thrush will retain his job, but move off the White House beat following a suspension which will last for approximately the next month.
The Times received criticism from many different constituencies after the move was made public. Progressives blasted the paper for undermining their own reporters who have reported on stories of sexual misconduct. Conservatives ripped the Times — an outlet many on the right perceive to lean liberal — for showing favor to a reporter who has done some tough reporting on Tepublicans, notably President Donald Trump. And journalists on Twitter were perplexed by the idea of the Times retaining Thrush but moving him off his beat, one on which he has spent years developing high-level sources.
Here’s a sample of the reaction from social media:
I wonder if the Times realizes the damage they've just done to their reporters who work on sexual harassment
— Zack Beauchamp (@zackbeauchamp) December 20, 2017
8. And if I were still at the Times, I'd be raging mad.
— Annie Lowrey (@AnnieLowrey) December 20, 2017
Thread. NYT's handling of Thrush has been absolutely disgraceful. https://t.co/ehnooAgtVR
— Dylan Matthews (@dylanmatt) December 20, 2017
a logical move since glenn thrush sexually harassed the white house https://t.co/W7VmDV7Vem
— sebastian gawker (@libbycwatson) December 20, 2017
In all seriousness, how does switching the news beat of an alleged serial predator fix the problem? https://t.co/LenZBd0aLC
— Constance Grady (@constancegrady) December 20, 2017
So they're not firing Glenn Thrush but they're removing him from the White House beat where he did stellar work because only people who act inoffensively can be on the White House beat? Similarly, it's okay to put someone offensive at, say, Foggy Bottom?
— John Podhoretz (@jpodhoretz) December 20, 2017
i'm sure switching beats will magically teach him to respect the women he works with https://t.co/DbHZiqPcSE
— Sarah Jones (@onesarahjones) December 20, 2017
New York Times isn't firing Glenn Thrush. But taking him off the White House beat. This makes little sense. Where he works or what he covers is irrelevant. Either hire him back in his old capacity or fire him outright. https://t.co/xLsajE4jux
— Joe Concha (@JoeConchaTV) December 20, 2017
I would really love to know what women at the Times, especially women who have experienced workplace harassment in the past, feel about this action and pullquote. https://t.co/4IE5iryie7
— Dara Lind (@DLind) December 20, 2017
It's mind-boggling. They confirmed he behaved in the abusive way accusers described, but decided to keep him anyway. No accountability. https://t.co/FEz4fvDIHp
— Heidi N Moore (@moorehn) December 20, 2017
This is a bizarre decision in several different ways https://t.co/mvCQDJS8Wd
— Griswold Christmas Vacation (@HashtagGriswold) December 20, 2017
Glenn Thrush, who kissed women without their consent and spread career-killing rumors about them, remains @nytimes' golden boy, will be "punished" by inflicting him on a different set of women. https://t.co/wxeIp5Bnew
— Erica C. Barnett (@ericacbarnett) December 20, 2017
And here it is, the ol' slap on the wrist punishment of a sexual predator because they make a company money. Shame on the NYT for thinking changing his beat is even relevant. It's not about the damn beat. https://t.co/YVivog54Tm
— Kat Duncan (@KatDuncanPhoto) December 20, 2017
Silly posturing from the NY Times – Why remove Glenn Thrush from the White House beat if you don’t think he committed fireable offenses?
— Charlie Spiering (@charliespiering) December 20, 2017
[image via screengrab]
——
Follow Joe DePaolo (@joe_depaolo) on Twitter
