2018 Pulitzer winners

Of the winners which do you feel is the piece that most reflects liberal bias. Do you think anything that is not positive about the Trump Administration is by definition biased?

 

Nobody breaks many big stories about people OUT of power, because no one would read them.

 

On the contrary, YF has searched out, read and catalogued every Clinton story for 18 years and counting ...

 

I completely agree with all of this. It was "searing" in parts, as it was described in the little capsuled description of it, but only because of the deed, and Roof's lack of response in the face and wake of it. Otherwise, that piece was more like an essay, and even, almost, an opinion piece in places, not a feature story.

And the author's inclusion of herself in the piece is what made it that way.

The first-person parts were very distracting, and even badly inappropriate, at times (see the part near the end, especially) -- for a feature story. What's more, I didn't feel like I found out anything about Dylann Roof, or his motivations, or "what happened to him" that I didn't already know or expect. This piece won just on the basis of its subject matter, that's it, as is sometimes the case when awarding recognition.

The best, most informed and telling part of the whole story came from Roof himself: "Sometimes, more now than before the incident, I feel that the people I talk to hang on my words as if they were all important or offer some sort of insight into my being. But this isn't the case; it never is with anyone. For example, I stated before I never used drugs to ‘drown the pain,’ or ‘self medicate.’ I used drugs because they get you high. There is no deeper meaning behind this. There is no deeper meaning behind any of my behavior.”

That's what I think of him, too. It's why he had no explanation to offer, or even that he could offer, for his actions, and no one else did, either. He was just an undeveloped, shallow, directionless kid who did something horrible just because he could. No one knew, or knows, who he is (not even the author, although she claims she does), because there's nothing deeper to him.

 

LOL.

(I do agree that she didn't nail the ending.)

 

There is a really good thread on this somewhere here in this forum. I think the majority of long magazine features include some first-person, often for some very good reasons (as discussed on that thread).

 

The 2018 Pulitzer Prize Winner for Photography Now Works for a Brewery - PhotoShelter Blog

 

If that were actually the case, Laura Ingraham would be at 18 Pulitzers and counting.

 

Dick, it won for the subject matter. However good it is, that’s why it won. I’d argue it specifically won because it was first person.

 

Pulitzers? Hell, I just wanna know if I won a friggin' APME award. I don't think I'm up for any Pulitzers.

 

You’re not.

 

You're really pathetic. All you do is follow me around and make sad, childish comments that I assume make you feel superior and enlightened.

You need to take a hard look in the mirror, then ask yourself why you do this, why you're so miserable and what life changes you need to make . Maybe you can have a little bit of happiness rather than playing on a message board late at night hurling insults at anonymous posters.