Matt Mullenweg’s Brief Automattic Ouster Leaves Questions About Leadership and Control

Automattic’s board placed the WordPress co-founder on paid leave and appointed an interim CEO. Within days, the leadership change had reversed, while the reasons behind it remained unclear.

Automattic confirmed September 12 that Matt Mullenweg is back as chairman and CEO, with the board’s support. TechCrunch.

The announcement followed a turbulent few days at the company behind WordPress.com. A board decision to place its founder on paid leave became public through internal employee messages, followed by an interim appointment and Mullenweg’s own announcement that he had regained control.

The sequence brought renewed attention to how Automattic is governed and how its corporate leadership relates to the wider WordPress project. It also left an unresolved question: what prompted the board to intervene in the first place?

The board places Mullenweg on leave

On September 9, Mullenweg told Automattic employees that the board had voted to put him on paid leave. Chief financial officer Mark Davies would become interim CEO, according to company Slack messages reviewed by 404 Media, which first reported the decision.

Mullenweg accused Davies and directors Ann Dunwoody, Toni Schneider, and Sue Decker of acting behind his back. His opposition was explicit:

I voted against that.

He said the resolution reached him 50 minutes before the board meeting. According to his account, repeated requests for additional time to consult independent legal counsel were denied.

Those details describe Mullenweg’s account of the process. They do not independently establish his allegation that others conspired against him.

Schneider separately told staff that the board had asked Mullenweg to step away from his CEO duties. Davies said Mullenweg would remain a director with a voice in the company’s direction.

Automattic subsequently confirmed the leave and Davies’ interim appointment in a statement supplied to 404 Media:

Matt Mullenweg is currently on leave from Automattic.

The company expressed confidence in Davies, but the statement did not explain the decision or specify how long the arrangement would last.

Mullenweg announces he is back in control

By September 11, employees were receiving a different message.

According to screenshots reviewed by 404 Media, Mullenweg announced:

Happy to announce the board is back in agreement, and I'm in control of Automattic.

He expressed respect for those involved and suggested that some of what had happened might have been a misunderstanding. His announcement was accompanied by a link to an LL Cool J music video.

At that stage, uncertainty remained about what had formally changed. The outlet reported that the board had not communicated further with employees beyond its earlier Wednesday messages.

404 Media also reported, citing sources, that Davies’ Slack account had been deactivated. That was a reported change to his account access, not confirmation of his employment status or an explanation of how the leadership dispute had been resolved.

The distinction between an internal announcement and a documented corporate decision matters here. Mullenweg’s message established what he was telling employees. It did not reveal the terms of any agreement among directors.

WordPress leadership remained unchanged

The disruption at Automattic did not produce an announced leadership change at the WordPress open-source project.

Executive Director Mary Hubbard addressed that distinction in a public statement:

Matt continues to lead our project, and I remain Executive Director.

Search Engine Journal reproduced her statement and linked to her original post on X.

This distinction can get lost in headlines about the WordPress co-founder.

Automattic is the commercial company that operates WordPress.com. WordPress is also an open-source software project supported by a broad community. Automattic’s own press information describes the software as written, maintained, and supported by thousands of independent contributors, with Automattic serving as a major contributor.

The two are closely connected, but a change in Automattic’s executive office does not automatically change who leads the open-source project.

For readers following the story, that means the board’s intervention should be understood as an Automattic leadership decision. Hubbard’s statement addressed continuity at WordPress separately.

The WP Engine dispute provides context

The leadership episode occurred while Automattic and Mullenweg were involved in litigation with WP Engine, including a dispute over the preservation of evidence.

In a motion filed July 28, WP Engine asked the court to impose sanctions over alleged failures to preserve relevant communications. The filing argues that missing evidence harmed its ability to pursue its claims.

These are allegations made by a party to the lawsuit. The motion itself does not establish that the alleged misconduct occurred.

Automattic disputed the allegations in an August 12 response published on its website. The company said it had issued a litigation hold, collected more than six terabytes of documents, and reviewed more than 1.5 million documents. It also said five of Mullenweg’s personal devices had been forensically imaged.

The company argued that disappearing messages concerned personal communications unrelated to the case, stating:

WP Engine cannot identify a single missing message about anything having to do with this case.

The evidence dispute helps explain the legal backdrop surrounding the company. It does not establish why the board placed Mullenweg on leave. The reporting reviewed for this article does not demonstrate a causal connection between the sanctions motion and the leadership decision.

What remains unanswered

The public accounts explain the sequence more clearly than the reasons behind it.

They leave unresolved why the board acted, what changed during the intervening days, and whether any agreement involved changes to executive responsibilities or corporate oversight. The reported Slack activity does not answer those questions.

For the WordPress community, the episode also highlights the importance of precise attribution. A founder’s allegation, an employee message, a company statement, and a court filing each establish different things.

A fuller explanation would require an account of the board’s reasoning and the arrangements that followed. Until those details emerge, conclusions about who prevailed internally, why directors changed course, or what the dispute means for Automattic’s long-term governance remain interpretations rather than established facts.