9 ms·
2019 Pulitzer Prize Winners
- pwinnski 7y agoSome amazing reporting listed here, including the runners-up.
- mring33621 7y agoSupposedly "Enemies of the People"
- commandlinefan 7y agoI don't know - love him or hate him, you have to agree this is a pretty anti-Trump list. Whether he's actually corrupt or not, this is evidence that the media is stacked against him - history will show if they were right or not.
- GavinMcG 7y agoNo, you really don't. Debunking "claims of self-made wealth and reveal[ing] a business empire riddled with tax dodges" isn't anti-Trump. Neither is "uncovering President Trump’s secret payoffs to two women during his campaign". That's just the normal job of investigative journalism, and those make up all of two out of fifteen categories.
- an_d_rew 7y agoPlus, they are reporting on, like, you know... the President of the United States. Those kind of shenanigans are kind-of a big deal, by definition.
- ameister14 7y ago3 - you missed the cartoonist, but it's ok I generally agree with you
- danso 7y agoWhich of the two award-winners that explicitly feature Trump do you feel is unfairly rewarded?
- cycrutchfield 7y agoNo, you see, because the reporters failed to uncover evidence of similar crimes “on the other side” they must be biased and therefore the enemy of the people.
- untog 7y agoIt's evidence the media investigates the conduct of the President. Which... good?
- CydeWeys 7y agoAnd the published body of scientific literature is pretty anti-flat-Earth. What's your point? People that commit crimes will ideally be investigated for them.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- danso 7y agoGreat to see the South Florida Sun-Sentinel win its second Public Service [0] award (considered the most prestigious of the journalism Pulitzers). Its first Public Service award -- a 2013 investigation of speeding cops [1] -- is still one of my favorite examples of database-driven journalism; a combination of clever public records requests for metadata, and math, to prove something that technically didn't exist (i.e. cops are usually the deciders of who is speeding). Its 2019 series about failures by school and police in the Parkland school shooting is also excellent. It also features among its public records work an milestone fuckup by officials in terms of PDF non-redaction [2]. [0] https://www.pulitzer.org/prize-winners-by-category/204 https://www.pulitzer.org/prize-winners-by-category/204 [1] https://www.pulitzer.org/winners/sun-sentinel https://www.pulitzer.org/winners/sun-sentinel [2] https://www.cjr.org/local_news/redaction-sun-sentinel.php https://www.cjr.org/local_news/redaction-sun-sentinel.php
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- rmorey 7y ago"A special citation to honor the journalists, staff and editorial board of the Capital Gazette, Annapolis, Maryland, for their courageous response to the largest killing of journalists in U.S. history in their newsroom on June 28, 2018, and for demonstrating unflagging commitment to covering the news and serving their community at a time of unspeakable grief. The citation comes with a $100,000 bequest by the Pulitzer Board to be used to further the newspaper’s journalistic mission." This is great
- usaphp 7y agoInteresting to see 4 winners with investigations about Trump.
- carrja99 7y agoWell, he is the president.
- commandlinefan 7y agoI honestly don't follow pulitzer prizes, but sampling a few recent years (in the past 20), I can't find any where there was ANY award for investigation against a president (there was one for investigation against Dick Cheney in 2008). Has this ever happened before?
- rdhyee 7y agoThe first example that comes to mind is the Pulitzer Prize-winning work by the Washington Post around Watergate. Granted, that was almost fifty years ago. See https://www.pulitzer.org/winners/washington-post https://www.pulitzer.org/winners/washington-post
- bduerst 7y ago>Has this ever happened before? Watergate investigation of President Nixon in 1973: https://www.pulitzer.org/winners/washington-post https://www.pulitzer.org/winners/washington-post
- CydeWeys 7y agoA Pulitzer was awarded for reporting on Clinton's Lewinsky affair: https://www.pulitzer.org/winners/maureen-dowd https://www.pulitzer.org/winners/maureen-dowd And I'm on mobile now but I'm sure they were awarded for some things having to do with the Iraq War. If presidents commit crimes, that's highly notable (and a big deal).
- yostrovs 7y ago
- tunesmith 7y agoI'm a little surprised that Miami Herald isn't on the list for their Epstein reporting, maybe they're not eligible until next year.
- briandear 7y agoProbably some politics at play regarding Epstein.
- RobAtticus 7y agoI came across this open letter from Alan Dershowitz, lobbying against their Pulitzer consideration[1]. I haven't seen a public response from either the reporter or the Miami Herald, so I'm curious about their views of the points he brings up. To be clear, I'm not saying he is accurate. I just don't know enough either way. He's obviously an interested party to the whole story. [1] https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14003/pulitzer-prize-fake-news https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14003/pulitzer-prize-fake...
- DSingularity 7y agoDo you think we should trust his narrative? I remember watching the disingenuous way he debated Chomsky on Israel/Palestine and thinking that he was totally sleazy [1] https://youtu.be/3ux4JU_sbB0 https://youtu.be/3ux4JU_sbB0
- RobAtticus 7y agoI am not sure. Like you, I have seen him engage in disingenuous methods of debating. However, it does seem he offered 'hard' proof to corroborate his story, which is why I'm curious to see how the Herald would respond. It seems we'll find out more about the Epstein affair as there are renewed pushes to investigate what happened in the plea deal.
- lvs 7y agoDersh argues many things confidently and aggressively that seem perhaps facially convincing. Or perhaps you simply don't have time or the presence of mind to present a counterargument in the moment. That's his "strength" as a lawyer. Don't believe any claim until you see the underlying exculpatory evidence, which only he claims exists and only he claims is exculpatory. In this case, he presents none of the evidence. Not one single piece of it. He only presents what the response of others was upon seeing it. He can pull this gag on the general public, but in a court one requires discovery.
- rmason 7y agoAs a native Detroiter it was great to see Aretha Franklin receive recognition. Just sad she couldn't have been awarded it when she could have been alive to enjoy it.
- gcbw2 7y agoHow long do they debate for? Latest piece is from june 2018(or I missed soemthing fresher?)!
- 781 7y agoOne of last year's winner: > Staffs of The New York Times and The Washington Post > For deeply sourced, relentlessly reported coverage in the public interest that dramatically furthered the nation’s understanding of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and its connections to the Trump campaign, the President-elect’s transition team and his eventual administration.
- Bendingo 7y agoThis perfectly demonstrates the state of US media (and western media in general). After over 2 years of misinformation, unfounded allegations, and downright fabrications, the media are now congratulating themselves on a job well done. It's clear that they have no intention of abandoning their Russiagate narrative, despite Mueller's report.
- istjohn 7y agoSo you've read the report? To my knowledge, the only portion of the 300+ page report that has so far been published is a a sentence fragment quoted by Trump appointee Attorney General William Barr in his 4 page summary. Seems a little premature to conclude we have the whole story. Also, multiple people close to Trump have been convicted of various crimes as a result of the past two years of investigation. Even if once the dust settles Trump stands clean and pure as the driven snow, investigators already have plenty to show for their work.
- catacombs 7y ago
- spammersharass 7y agoAre we going to rescind the Pulitzer Prizes for the "journalists" talking about the Russian "collusion"? Failure to do so drastically reduces the merit of receiving such a prize. Same thing with the Nobel "peace" prize given to Obama.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- dominotw 7y agoThis is like going to a film festival to watch spiderman 2. I was hoping to pick up something for next read but I really don't want to read another trump stuff. All the trump/immigrant/women/muslim/minority news have cast a pall of anxiety and dread over my life. was hoping to get some awarness about a new cause/topic but this just whats in news cycle everyday.
- marktangotango 7y agoAs an aside, I always recommend Pulitzer Prize winning “Soul of a New Machine” by Kidder to technical audiences. It’s a great read with some cool history too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Soul_of_a_New_Machine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Soul_of_a_New_Machine
- colechristensen 7y agoThis is problematic. Pulitzer is rewarding high-brow emotional appeal journalism. All disaster and irrelevant scandal. The journalism we need today is shining light on the ever-increasing complexities of the world and the effects, not the latest shock, awe, and smear.
- intuitionist 7y agoInteresting that the music prize once again only cites “art music” after Kendrick Lamar won last year.