Washington Post wins 6 Pulitzers

[PeteyPirate]

Including in the coveted public service category:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/07/AR2008040701359.html?hpid=artslot

 

[Ace]

That violin story was interesting. I liked that.

 

[finishthehat]

And their film critic, Ann Hornaday, was a finalist.

 

[DanOregon]

The Pulitzers are getting to be like the Joe Lapchick Invitational.

 

[Pulitzer Wannabe]

Shut out again!

 

[Ace]

Shut out again!

Good for you. You won't have to change your name!

 

[Pulitzer Wannabe]

Shut out again!

Good for you. You won't have to change your name!

Well, at least now the speculation can end - I'm not Bob Dylan.

 

[PeteyPirate]

The Pulitzers are getting to be like the Joe Lapchick Invitational.

Do you feel like there was some ordinary work honored here?

 

[Birdscribe]

That violin story was interesting. I liked that.

Nice story, yes. But how in the name of Joseph Pulitzer did John Romano's magnificent feature on the Iraq War widow in the St. Petersburg Times not even merit finalist status?

I'm speechless at this omission. If there was EVER a Pulitzer-worthy feature, well, that would be the one. :-[

 

[Frank_Ridgeway]

The Pulitzers are getting to be like the Joe Lapchick Invitational.

Do you feel like there was some ordinary work honored here?

Why, because "Funky Winkerbean" was a finalist for editorial cartooning? I kid you not.

 

[sirvaliantbrown]

I loved the Weingarten story. The Walter Reed series was a no-brainer...the Blackwater stories were terrific...and while I hadn't read those economics columns, they are pretty awesomely prescient.

No complaints from me...and I'm especially happy Weingarten's won.

 

[Left_Coast]

I'm shocked there are no Singleton papers that won.

 

[Hustle]

The Walter Reed stuff didn't even win first place in the Virginia state contest for series of news stories. Going in, I figured I knew the winner of at least one category... I guess I didn't. Which makes me wonder why I keep entering.

 

[Fenian_Bastard]

I ****ing hated that Weingarten story. I thought it was elitist crap.
I'm stunned.

 

[pallister]

If you thought it was elitist crap, it really must have been off the charts.

 

[Del_B_Vista]

As a small contributor to a Pulitzer Prize won by our paper a couple years back, I give my congrats to the folks at the WaPo.

(I never, ever woulda thought I'd be able to write that sentence.)

 

[DanOregon]

I'm not saying the Pulitzers are rigged and don't award great work, but it is interesting that some stories that win don't fare as well in competitions when the work is judged somewhat blindly by out of state panels that don't have any connections to the work being judged.

 

[sirvaliantbrown]

The Walter Reed stuff didn't even win first place in the Virginia state contest for series of news stories.

So...are you saying that automatically means the stories were unworthy of a Pulitzer?

 

[Michael_ Gee]

The Pulitzers are a circle jerk for our "leading" newspapers. That's not to say some of those honored didn't do unbelievably outstanding work, because they did. But as far as impact goes, Mark Feeney of the Boston Globe won the Pulitzer for criticism. I read the Globe daily, and I don't know who he is.
The law of averages says the Times, Post, LA Times, etc. do not do 90 percent of the best newspaper stories in the U.S. each year. But that's how the Pulitzers come out. It's a bag job.

 

[Frank_Ridgeway]

Oh, I think they have the resources to do certain kinds of stories better than anyone else. And for criticism, they tend to have people who are better qualified in those disciplines than most. It's not their fault that most papers have given up covering more than minimum.