I'm not sure this logic is sound. For starters, it feels like an appeal to authority. I don't think Pulitzer gets to decide who is credible, as they possibly

I'm not sure this logic is sound. For starters, it feels like an appeal to authority. I don't think Pulitzer gets to decide who is credible, as they possibly (likely?) have an agenda like anyone else. Second, I'm not sure how many hundreds of Pulitzer prizes have been given out over the years, but I surely don't blindly trust every source that has every been awarded one. Third, receiving a Pulitzer price for one story/investigation, doesn't mean that all the stories written by your dozens of other reporters also become credible.