When isn’t the sight of the New York Times a beautiful thing? On Saturday, the newspaper reached new heights as a quick scan of the front page gave proof that women had finally torn through the paper ceiling, in 2016, at a newspaper that’s well known for celebrating its own progressive leanings.
What a terrific sight. Check out this front page. Read the bylines. https://t.co/llkjZRLUK4
— John Schwartz (@jswatz) August 20, 2016
OK, just this once … as long as we’re not obligated to read the articles.
All #women writers on the @nytimes front page today. https://t.co/MV9Zc2XkyG
— Krista Longtin (@kristalongtin) August 20, 2016
That is surprising, if only because we’d assumed the same thing had happened lots of times by now. Is this a first? Should we be ordering a cake or something?
@jswatz @GlennKesslerWP I did and I had to read your feed to understand what the issue was. I didn't notice. It didn't strike me as odd.
— (((Se Ipsa))) (@SeIpsa) August 20, 2016
@jswatz Goosebumps. Thanks for sharing.
— johanna skilling (@johannask) August 20, 2016
@johannask @jswatz I got a lump in my throat, tear in my eye, and my knees went weak as I covered myself in smug liberal self-satisfaction.
— PJ Gladnick (@pjglad) August 20, 2016
Hey, let the Times have its moment, OK? Having an all-female front page is big news, so don’t ruin it.
@jswatz @GlennKesslerWP Do you mean the all-female front page Jonathan Martin messed up? (I have nothing against him. I like Jonathan's.) ?
— Jonathan Menon (@JonathanMenon) August 20, 2016
Wait … so Jonathan Martin’s a dude?
the only male byline on this NYT front page is @jmartNYT https://t.co/9AJRFNIOgP
— Hadas Gold (@Hadas_Gold) August 20, 2016
@Hadas_Gold Yes, but @jmartNYT is in touch with his feminine side.
— John Schwartz (@jswatz) August 20, 2016
So we’re making a big deal out of an almost all-female front page?
Should be all female-for more diversity! https://t.co/6ghhl5uhkD
— Instapundit.com (@instapundit) August 20, 2016
