I’ve read the analysis, reaction and counter-reaction. I’ve read Poynter, Romensko and all the Tweets (my, how Twitter has changed the dynamic of how awards and nominations, such as the Pulitzers, but also, really, the Oscars, the Grammys, etc.). I even feel like I was in some of the newsrooms as they learned of their award, thanks to these fly-on-the-wall photos.
Yet, as much as the Pulitzers are a celebration of great, make that grand, journalism, it’s hard to view today’s news as nothing less than a seminal moment when the Earth moved underneath our feet. Yet it is such a massive event, we may not have noticed.
News organizations which exist mostly online, the Huffington Post and Politico, won their first Pulitzers, yet the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post did not.
In other words, the tectonic plates of journalism just shifted.
The last card traditional media had to play was that it’s still the home of Important Journalism and the kind of enterprising reporting that wins awards.
Now, it’s certainly true that most of the Pulitzers won today, naturally, were by traditional media organizations, but the New York Times winning the award for International Reporting is surprising to whom?
What was surprising is that there was no Pulitzer awarded for Editorial Writing. The editorial board of my hometown newspaper, the Tampa Bay Times, was a finalist and so it would have been interesting if it won, but what does it say when none of the work from any of the editorial boards across this big, broad nation merits an award? It would be like Hollywood failing to select a Best Actor or Best Actress at the Academy Awards.
Actually, this year’s Pulitzers had a slight connection to Hollywood with the Boston Globe’s Wesley Morris winning the prize for Commentary.
I’d rather read what’s on IMDB.