1. A couple of years ago, I asked Marty Baron to talk on the record for this piece on how, at the eleventh hour, he killed reporting on a hostile work environment at 60 Minutes and allegations against Jeff Fager. He said no. https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/04/what-was-the-washington-post-afraid-of.html
2. I’ve already said my piece, but since I see the excellent @ichotiner asked Baron about it and Baron called it a “misportrayal of what actually transpired,” I just want to quickly review the undisputed facts. https://www.newyorker.com/culture/the-new-yorker-interview/marty-baron-considers-his-time-at-the-washington-post
3. After we broke the Charlie Rose story, we followed up by reporting on CBS/60 Minutes, which fired him. Tricky bc of 60 and WaPo's partnership. Our editors recused themselves; Baron didn't. Here's why I wondered about his identifying w a newsroom leader: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/04/what-was-the-washington-post-afraid-of.html
4. At the end of a laborious process, including lots of direct input from Baron, we had his signoff to tell our sources and subjects we were publishing the next day. We had documents showing a near-million dollar settlement/NDA, two more accusers (+more). It was copyedited.
5. The story wasn’t published the next day. Instead, Fager’s lawyers (also Matt Lauer and Glenn Thrush’s) provided information they said would discredit one of Fager’s accusers, including warm emails she wrote to him, her boss. That was the death knell. The piece was gutted.
6. Later, @ronanfarrow reported much of what we’d tried to, as well as on the campaign to kill our story. Fager was eventually fired after threatening a CBS reporter looking into allegations against him. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/08/06/les-moonves-and-cbs-face-allegations-of-sexual-misconduct