Crossing the Line: Trump’s Private Conduct With Women
Beneath the header is this:
Interviews with dozens of women who encountered Donald J. Trump revealed unsettling conduct over decades.
They offer a complex and at times contradictory portrait of a man who both nurtured women’s careers and mocked their physical appearance.
Among other charges in this story, the Times accuses Trump “of unending commentary on the female form, a shrewd reliance on ambitious women, and unsettling workplace conduct…”
What does the New York Times — the so-called “paper of record” — not tell you in this story? How about what could surely be called the “unsettling conduct” of the Times itself ? Specifically, it does not say that a mere 18 days earlier on April 28, 2016 — not just four decades ago, as it accuses Trump — the New York Times was accused in a federal lawsuit filed of not only sexism but racism and ageism to boot. And that would be in a lawsuit filed by employees of — yes — the New York Times.
You read that right. We’re talking a federal lawsuit that targets Times CEO Mark Thompson and theTimes itself for — to use the Times’ language about Trump — far more than “unsettling conduct.”
Let’s do some direct quotes here (hat tip the Daily Caller) from the lawsuit:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
ERNESTINE GRANT and MARJORIE : WALKER, on behalf of themselves individually : and on behalf of all similarly situated persons,
THE NEW YORK TIMES COMPANY, MARK : THOMPSON, in his individual and professional : capacities, and MEREDITH LEVIEN, in her : individual and professional capacities,
Plaintiffs Ernestine Grant and Marjorie Walker (together, “Plaintiffs”), on behalf of themselves and all similarly situated persons, through undersigned counsel, Wigdor LLP, as and for their Complaint against The New York Times Company (the “Times” or the “Company”), Mark Thompson and Meredith Levien (together “Defendants”), hereby allege:
NATURE OF THE CLAIMS
1. 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. In furtherance of these discriminatory goals, the Times has created a workplace rife with disparities. Unfortunately, the Times’s Advertising staff on the business side is systematically becoming increasingly younger and whiter. Plaintiffs Grant and Walker (together, “Class Representatives”) are employed in the Advertising division at the Times and have experienced discrimination, and were retaliated against, when they complained about such discrimination.
2. Beginning with the appointment of Defendant Mark Thompson to Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) in 2012, the workplace at the Times has become an environment rife with discrimination based on age, race, and gender.
And so on…. and so on… goes the law suit. Was there a major front page story on the front page of the New York Times about this? Can you imagine if Donald Trump had been subject of a federal law suit mere days ago charging him with being racist, sexist, and ageist?
MANHATTAN (CN) — A federal class action lawsuit accuses the New York Times of widespread internal race, age and gender discrimination, favoring younger, white “handsome men.”
The 61-page complaint filed Thursday by Ernestine Grant, 62, and Marjorie Walker, 61, accuses the New York Times Company, along with CEO Mark Thompson and executive vice president Meredith Levien, of multiple violations of the Equal Pay Act, the Civil Rights Act and the New York State Human Rights Law.
The lawsuit claims the discrimination practices manifested in the company’s failure to compensate and promote older, black and/or female employees at the same rate as younger, white and/or male employees.
Grant and Walker say the Times selected “older, black and/or female employees” for buyouts during company-wide layoffs at “rates that are statistically unlikely to have occurred by chance.”
According to the complaint, since her hiring by Thompson in 2013, Levien made statements that were “shockingly rife with racially charged innuendos” and pushed for the Times staff to be “people who look like the people we are selling to.” She even allegedly told staffers “this isn’t what our sales team should look like.”
The complaint says that older and minority employees were then “packaged out” and those “vacancies were rapidly filled” with white employees under the age of 40.
The lawsuit alleges that Grant and Walker were denied promotions and raises and compensated less than younger white employees with “far less” qualifications and experience.
Got all that? Here is a federal — say again federal — lawsuit charging the New York Times with being racist, sexist and ageist.
One could go on and on here about liberal media double standards and all the rest. But in fact it is the New York Times, not Donald Trump, who stands accused in federal court of hardcore racism, sexism, and ageism — by its own employees at that.
This smear job by the mind-boggling double standard of the New York Times is a Class A example of what millions of Americans are rebelling against when they vote for Donald Trump.
Say again? The Times makes a major front page story of Trump appreciating a girl in a bathing suit? While the paper’s CEO is being sued in federal court for hardcore sexism, racism, and ageism? A lawsuit that is literally merely weeks old?