Washington Post fires reporter Felicia Somnez who objected to misogynistic tweets

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know nothing about this fired reporter, but from where I'm standing the Washington Post looks bad, because they seem to be supporting the first reporter who made an unacceptably misogynist remark. Like PP said, that kind of comment does not exist in a vacuum - for someone to actually type and send this, it means he often thinks like that, and feels secure enough in his employment and colleagues to publish those remarks. It means the Post is a shitty place for a woman to work. He should have been fired first.

+1

I was just in the process of getting a Post subscription and I’ve decided against it after this.

Yup, I do have a Post subscription but I'm not happy with this. Fire the woman reporter for being a loose cannon, ok. Not firing the man who sent the sexist tweets, not ok.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know nothing about this fired reporter, but from where I'm standing the Washington Post looks bad, because they seem to be supporting the first reporter who made an unacceptably misogynist remark. Like PP said, that kind of comment does not exist in a vacuum - for someone to actually type and send this, it means he often thinks like that, and feels secure enough in his employment and colleagues to publish those remarks. It means the Post is a shitty place for a woman to work. He should have been fired first.

+1

I was just in the process of getting a Post subscription and I’ve decided against it after this.

Yup, I do have a Post subscription but I'm not happy with this. Fire the woman reporter for being a loose cannon, ok. Not firing the man who sent the sexist tweets, not ok.

Exactly. We should all complain to the Post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know nothing about this fired reporter, but from where I'm standing the Washington Post looks bad, because they seem to be supporting the first reporter who made an unacceptably misogynist remark. Like PP said, that kind of comment does not exist in a vacuum - for someone to actually type and send this, it means he often thinks like that, and feels secure enough in his employment and colleagues to publish those remarks. It means the Post is a shitty place for a woman to work. He should have been fired first.

+1

I was just in the process of getting a Post subscription and I’ve decided against it after this.

Yup, I do have a Post subscription but I'm not happy with this. Fire the woman reporter for being a loose cannon, ok. Not firing the man who sent the sexist tweets, not ok.

I would have continued my subscription if both had been fired. But suspending him with a slap on the wrist for a deeply misogynist tweet while firing her? No, I don’t need to give that clearly sexist institution my money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know nothing about this fired reporter, but from where I'm standing the Washington Post looks bad, because they seem to be supporting the first reporter who made an unacceptably misogynist remark. Like PP said, that kind of comment does not exist in a vacuum - for someone to actually type and send this, it means he often thinks like that, and feels secure enough in his employment and colleagues to publish those remarks. It means the Post is a shitty place for a woman to work. He should have been fired first.

+1

I was just in the process of getting a Post subscription and I’ve decided against it after this.

Yup, I do have a Post subscription but I'm not happy with this. Fire the woman reporter for being a loose cannon, ok. Not firing the man who sent the sexist tweets, not ok.

I am a lifelong subscriber to the Post, a liberal and a feminist. I am not happy about Weigel’s retweet but he removed it, apologized and was suspended. Then the entire newsroom was warned that everyone needed to stop disparaging their colleagues and the Post in person or online, and Sonmez kept at it for days. She’s done. For anyone who’s ever had employees it should be obvious why. Yes she will sue again, but I’m sure that was part of their calculus and they needed her to be gone anyway.

Also, Jesus Post, only about five people should be able to send emails to the entire company. Fix that now, sheesh.

[Anonymous]

I think this is the right outcome.

He should not have retweeted that stupid joke, but let’s keep things in perspective. Retweeting is a pretty minor thing that has very little to do with his job and he apologized for it. He should have apologized for it, but that should have been the end of it.

She was probably even fine pointing it out once on Twitter but really should have just pointed it out to him privately and maybe to the HR department if he didn’t immediately remove it. Everything after that was harassment on her part. Her response should have been in line with the nature of the offense. Demanding that a person get fired over a minor offense and then continuing to harass him publicly over something that should be an internal HR issue was grounds for her getting fired. None of us is perfect and we do not want to live in a world where silly minor things are blown up to be career-ending scandals.

[Anonymous]

Funny. I was thinking about canceling my WaPo subscription, but now I’m definitely keeping it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think this is the right outcome.

He should not have retweeted that stupid joke, but let’s keep things in perspective. Retweeting is a pretty minor thing that has very little to do with his job and he apologized for it. He should have apologized for it, but that should have been the end of it.

She was probably even fine pointing it out once on Twitter but really should have just pointed it out to him privately and maybe to the HR department if he didn’t immediately remove it. Everything after that was harassment on her part. Her response should have been in line with the nature of the offense. Demanding that a person get fired over a minor offense and then continuing to harass him publicly over something that should be an internal HR issue was grounds for her getting fired. None of us is perfect and we do not want to live in a world where silly minor things are blown up to be career-ending scandals.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this is the right outcome.

He should not have retweeted that stupid joke, but let’s keep things in perspective. Retweeting is a pretty minor thing that has very little to do with his job and he apologized for it. He should have apologized for it, but that should have been the end of it.

She was probably even fine pointing it out once on Twitter but really should have just pointed it out to him privately and maybe to the HR department if he didn’t immediately remove it. Everything after that was harassment on her part. Her response should have been in line with the nature of the offense. Demanding that a person get fired over a minor offense and then continuing to harass him publicly over something that should be an internal HR issue was grounds for her getting fired. None of us is perfect and we do not want to live in a world where silly minor things are blown up to be career-ending scandals.

+1

He tweeted something nasty about women, and she called it out on him. Why does he get a pass for maligning 50% of the population publicly, and she gets dinged for "lack of collegiality" for pointing out he's a misogynist. There's something wrong with that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this is the right outcome.

He should not have retweeted that stupid joke, but let’s keep things in perspective. Retweeting is a pretty minor thing that has very little to do with his job and he apologized for it. He should have apologized for it, but that should have been the end of it.

She was probably even fine pointing it out once on Twitter but really should have just pointed it out to him privately and maybe to the HR department if he didn’t immediately remove it. Everything after that was harassment on her part. Her response should have been in line with the nature of the offense. Demanding that a person get fired over a minor offense and then continuing to harass him publicly over something that should be an internal HR issue was grounds for her getting fired. None of us is perfect and we do not want to live in a world where silly minor things are blown up to be career-ending scandals.

+1

He tweeted something nasty about women, and she called it out on him. Why does he get a pass for maligning 50% of the population publicly, and she gets dinged for "lack of collegiality" for pointing out he's a misogynist. There's something wrong with that.

He didn’t get a pass, he was suspended for a month. She didn’t get dinged for pointing out misogyny, she got dinged for tweeting non-stop about it and airing WaPo’s dirty laundry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this is the right outcome.

He should not have retweeted that stupid joke, but let’s keep things in perspective. Retweeting is a pretty minor thing that has very little to do with his job and he apologized for it. He should have apologized for it, but that should have been the end of it.

She was probably even fine pointing it out once on Twitter but really should have just pointed it out to him privately and maybe to the HR department if he didn’t immediately remove it. Everything after that was harassment on her part. Her response should have been in line with the nature of the offense. Demanding that a person get fired over a minor offense and then continuing to harass him publicly over something that should be an internal HR issue was grounds for her getting fired. None of us is perfect and we do not want to live in a world where silly minor things are blown up to be career-ending scandals.

+1

He tweeted something nasty about women, and she called it out on him. Why does he get a pass for maligning 50% of the population publicly, and she gets dinged for "lack of collegiality" for pointing out he's a misogynist. There's something wrong with that.

He didn’t get a pass, he was suspended for a month. She didn’t get dinged for pointing out misogyny, she got dinged for tweeting non-stop about it and airing WaPo’s dirty laundry.

So she was fired for whistleblowing? Even worse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think this is the right outcome.

He should not have retweeted that stupid joke, but let’s keep things in perspective. Retweeting is a pretty minor thing that has very little to do with his job and he apologized for it. He should have apologized for it, but that should have been the end of it.

She was probably even fine pointing it out once on Twitter but really should have just pointed it out to him privately and maybe to the HR department if he didn’t immediately remove it. Everything after that was harassment on her part. Her response should have been in line with the nature of the offense. Demanding that a person get fired over a minor offense and then continuing to harass him publicly over something that should be an internal HR issue was grounds for her getting fired. None of us is perfect and we do not want to live in a world where silly minor things are blown up to be career-ending scandals.

+1

He tweeted something nasty about women, and she called it out on him. Why does he get a pass for maligning 50% of the population publicly, and she gets dinged for "lack of collegiality" for pointing out he's a misogynist. There's something wrong with that.

He didn’t get a pass, he was suspended for a month. She didn’t get dinged for pointing out misogyny, she got dinged for tweeting non-stop about it and airing WaPo’s dirty laundry.

So she was fired for whistleblowing? Even worse.

No.

[Anonymous]

She deserved it. If you have an issue with someone at your employer, you take it to your manager or HR, you don't go blasting it on Twitter. She was warned more than once about this, and continued to do it. That's a good reason to terminate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know nothing about this fired reporter, but from where I'm standing the Washington Post looks bad, because they seem to be supporting the first reporter who made an unacceptably misogynist remark. Like PP said, that kind of comment does not exist in a vacuum - for someone to actually type and send this, it means he often thinks like that, and feels secure enough in his employment and colleagues to publish those remarks. It means the Post is a shitty place for a woman to work. He should have been fired first.

+1

I was just in the process of getting a Post subscription and I’ve decided against it after this.

Yup, I do have a Post subscription but I'm not happy with this. Fire the woman reporter for being a loose cannon, ok. Not firing the man who sent the sexist tweets, not ok.

Exactly. We should all complain to the Post.

Except some of us are applauding the Post for firing her…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Funny. I was thinking about canceling my WaPo subscription, but now I’m definitely keeping it.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She deserved it. If you have an issue with someone at your employer, you take it to your manager or HR, you don't go blasting it on Twitter. She was warned more than once about this, and continued to do it. That's a good reason to terminate.

She… has a long and complicated history.

I feel bad for her, but guarantee there was already a PIP related to her behavior on social media use, and this violated it.