"Pondering Abramson’s firing- again (for the last time)"
This is a really excellent post from Riverdaughter; it's clear that her time in Big Pharma gave her laser eyes for the grimmer realities of corporate politics.
NOTE I should say that I avoid reading The Times now, and I don't follow it on Twitter or like it on Facebook. However, over the last year or so, and especially over the last six months, people would like or retweet Times articles... that I would click through to (though I filtered out material on politics or the wars). And almost every time, the story would have a new angle, and would be interesting, informative, and well-written.
Since it was Abramson’s job to make that happen, I assume she was responsible for that. So the Times was dumb to fire her, to say the very least; judging by results, she's a fine editor who brings out the best in her writers, so what does anything else matter?