2018 Pulitzer winners

[Alma]

Coverage of Trump, Roy Moore and metoo the big winners

Winners

 

[Azrael]

As I said on the other thread, congratulations to the winners.

But I still don't think we should be giving Pulitzers to magazines. And I say that as someone who works in magazines.

 

[DanOregon]

I think a big problem is that there are fewer "middle-class" papers. You have the NYT and WP and then.....the scavenger class (DFM, GateHouse etc.) doesn't mean they can't do quality work, but Gannett (with McClatchy the last two "mid-majors" won two this year on enterprise - that's kind of surprising.

 

[TheSportsPredictor]

This photojournalist won a Pulitzer for an image he made on his last day in the newsroom

 

[Dick Whitman]

I'm glad that the Post's Roy Moore coverage won a Pulitzer for something, but is "investigative reporting" the appropriate category? I always think of "investigative reporting" as something with documentary support - sifting through public records, that kind of thing. The Post did a remarkable job, but it did a remarkable job talking to people. Even the "Spotlight" Pulitzer for the Boston Globe required going through old directories and connecting the various dots.

 

[Dick Whitman]

We talked at length on here about the Dylann Roof piece from "GQ" that won the feature award. Like Az, I'd like to see this restricted to traditional dailies, although that line is pretty blurred these days. The Roof piece and the "Esquire" piece on the girl convicted of talking her boyfriend into committing suicide were two magazine features that stood out to me this past year, though. I'm sure there are a few that are slipping my mind. I assume that the David Grann piece on Henry Woolsey was published in 2018, right?

 

[Big Circus]

Correct - the Grann piece was published in February 2018.

Also, Kendrick Lamar! I like his music but haven't quite worked through my feelings on him winning this. It's weird, if nothing else.

 

[GBNF]

The winning piece on Dylan Roof is good, but when did it become so appropriate to insert oneself into a feature story, or, why is it labeled as such? The first-person was very distracting to me, and while the reporting was solid, it didn't feel to me deserving of the Pulitzer.

 

[Alma]

As I wrote on the other thread - it’s a very politicized Pulitzer winners list. Has it ever been this liberal? No. I doubt that.

 

[Azrael]

As I wrote on the other thread - it’s a very politicized Pulitzer winners list. Has it ever been this liberal? No. I doubt that.

Which specifically strike you as 'liberal?'

www.pulitzer.org/prize-winners-by-year/2018

 

[Alma]

Which specifically strike you as 'liberal?'

www.pulitzer.org/prize-winners-by-year/2018

The word "most" indicates, well, most.

Not that it wasn't good journalism.

 

[QYFW]

The Anti-Trump Pulitzers.

 

[LanceyHoward]

As I wrote on the other thread - it’s a very politicized Pulitzer winners list. Has it ever been this liberal? No. I doubt that.

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?

 

[Michael_ Gee]

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.

 

[Slacker]

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 ...

 

[WriteThinking]

The winning piece on Dylan Roof is good, but when did it become so appropriate to insert oneself into a feature story, or, why is it labeled as such? The first-person was very distracting to me, and while the reporting was solid, it didn't feel to me deserving of the Pulitzer.

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.

 

[Dick Whitman]

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 sometimes happens with awards.

LOL.

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

 

[Dick Whitman]

The winning piece on Dylan Roof is good, but when did it become so appropriate to insert oneself into a feature story, or, why is it labeled as such?

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).

 

[HanSenSE]

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

 

[Shropshire Slasher]

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

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