This week the winners of the Pulitzer Prize were announced and a couple of things struck me as interesting.
1. The first award was given for non-print (ie online) reporting to ProPublica's "The Wall Street Money Machine"
and
2. For the first time there was no award given out for local reporting of breaking news (even though there were four finalists in the category).
These two things show that online news is considered credible enough that it is deserving of a Pulitzer, and that there is something lacking in local reporting. I think that it is very significant that there was no prize given out in that category. They could have given the prize to any of those finalists, but they chose not to. Any other thoughts on this?
(see list of other winners here)
Hate to be the one to tell you this but no one really cares about the Pulitzer. We know the people that hand out the awards are granola crunching pinkos. Obviously the person who deserved the sham of an award didn't win it and pulitzer is becoming more and more irrelevant every year along with the Nobel prize and the peace prize.
ReplyDeleteI think that there is a possibility that it might not just be that they weren't deserving of a Pulitzer but online news is a new focus and so it is possible that people wanted to give it to online news instead of local reporting.
ReplyDelete