Emma Brockes at the Guardian on Beyoncé and Solange's crisis control. “As it is, the world has been left to decode the post-gala lunge by Solange Knowles at Jay Z from other sources – primarily, she and her sister's accounts on Instagram, the world's foremost wire service for passive aggressively-rendered news. In the old days, evasion came in the form of the content-free press release, used by stars and their agents to neutralize scandal through brain-numbing denial. But the world moves on. No one asks for privacy at this difficult time any more,” Brockes writes. “Part of the exuberant uptake of the story has rested perhaps on the novelty of a celebrity brawl that doesn't involve Alec Baldwin. And the dynamics of this particular drama are, in spite of the fame of the players, recognizable to anyone with a family. It's like a piece of site-specific public theatre called Divided Loyalties.” Matt Sullivan at the Guardian tweets, “.@emmabrockes on Solange-gate: "British people have been doing this sort of thing naturally ... for centuries."
Gabriel Sherman at New York on why The New York Times fired Jill Abramson. “For the past six months, Jill Abramson walked the newsroom like a woman under siege. ‘She was feeling it and was exhausted,’ one close colleague said. Abramson, who is 60, didn’t make it to the midterms. Yesterday, at 2:00 p.m., Arthur Sulzberger Jr. summoned the paper’s senior editors to a meeting on the third floor of the newsroom to inform them that Abramson was being ousted and replaced by her number two, Dean Baquet,” Sherman writes. “As in many matters involving the executive editor of the New York Times, the story is as much about Arthur Sulzberger, Jr. as his employee. Abramson’s problems with Sulzberger began even before she was appointed. Still, it was the cold abruptness of the firing that has the newsroom stunned.” The Montreal Gazette’s Peggy Curran tweets, “More on the complicated ugly firing of @nytimes editor Jill Abramson”.