Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Pulitzer Prize for Commentary

The Pulitzer Prize for Commentary is an annual award administered by Columbia University to honor distinguished commentary published by an American news organization, using any available journalistic tools, with a monetary prize of $15,000.^[1] Established in 1970, the prize recognizes opinion journalism that combines originality, clarity, and persuasive insight on public issues, often through columns that influence national discourse.^[2] Notable recipients include William A. Caldwell of The Record as the inaugural winner in 1971 for his compelling suburban-focused columns, conservative voices such as Charles Krauthammer in 1987 for witty national issue analysis and Peggy Noonan in 2017 for her reflections on political leadership, and more recent honorees like Michael Paul Williams in 2021 for scrutinizing corruption and civil rights in Virginia.^[3] The category has occasionally sparked debate, particularly the 2020 award to Nikole Hannah-Jones for her 1619 Project essay, which prompted calls for revocation from academic groups citing historical inaccuracies, such as the unsubstantiated claim that the American Revolution was primarily fought to preserve slavery, highlighting tensions between journalistic impact and empirical rigor in evaluative institutions.^[4]

Historical Background

Establishment and Inaugural Awards

The Pulitzer Prize for Commentary was established in 1970 through an expansion of the Pulitzer categories announced by Columbia University president Andrew W. Cordier in December 1969, introducing an award for "distinguished criticism or commentary" to recognize excellence in signed newspaper analysis distinct from the existing Editorial Writing category, which typically featured unsigned institutional pieces.^[5] Administered by the Pulitzer Prize Board at Columbia University, the new category aimed to honor insightful, reflective commentary drawn from columns that addressed public issues with clarity and moral purpose, reflecting the growing role of individual voices in U.S. journalism amid evolving practices like interpretive reporting on complex social and political events.^[6] In its inaugural presentation for work in 1969, the prize was split between Marquis W. Childs of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch for distinguished commentary on national and international affairs, exemplifying a personal style that delved into policy implications and societal tensions, and Ada Louise Huxtable of The New York Times for criticism of architecture and urban design.^[7] Childs's award set an early precedent for commentary emphasizing causal analysis over advocacy, filling a perceived gap in prior Pulitzer recognitions that underrepresented columnists' contributions to public discourse.^[7] This launch occurred against the backdrop of 1970s newspaper trends, where signed opinion columns proliferated in response to reader demand for nuanced takes on post-Vietnam War disillusionment and domestic upheavals, prompting the board to adapt criteria to evolving media forms.^[8]

Evolution of Scope and Administration

The Pulitzer Prize for Commentary, introduced in 1970, originally encompassed distinguished columns published in U.S. newspapers, prioritizing work that offered analytical or illustrative perspectives on public affairs through examples and information. Administrative oversight rested with the Pulitzer Prize Board, which relied on journalism juries to nominate finalists from print submissions, reflecting the era's dominance of newspaper commentary amid limited media competition. This scope emphasized substantive engagement with issues, with board decisions guiding refinements to sustain the category's focus on impactful opinion amid evolving journalistic practices.^[9] By the 2000s, the board responded to technological shifts by expanding eligibility to digital formats, starting with acceptance of online content in all journalism categories, including Commentary, from 2006 onward. This adjustment addressed the proliferation of web-based news, where newspapers increasingly published columns digitally, driven by reader migration online and the decline of print circulation due to fragmented media attention from cable news and early internet platforms. In 2009, eligibility extended to online-only news organizations, enabling non-print entities to submit while upholding standards for originality and civic insight.^[9]^[10]^[9] Further administrative updates included a full transition to digital entry systems in 2012, facilitating higher submission volumes—from dozens in the 1970s to hundreds per cycle by the 2010s—as commentary formats multiplied in response to 24-hour news cycles that eroded print monopolies and incentivized outlets to produce more opinion content for audience retention. Jury panels, drawn from over 80 editors, publishers, and academics, incorporated diverse media representatives to evaluate entries, balancing traditional newspaper primacy with digital realities without altering core evaluative criteria. These evolutions ensured the prize's adaptation to causal drivers like broadband adoption and multichannel competition, preserving its role in recognizing commentary that informs public discourse.^[11]^[12]^[9]

Award Mechanics

Eligibility and Submission Guidelines

The Pulitzer Prize for Commentary is awarded for distinguished opinion writing that offers well-reasoned and compelling arguments addressing issues of public interest, published regularly during the preceding calendar year in a qualifying U.S. news outlet, such as a newspaper, magazine, wire service, or eligible news site.^[13] Eligible work may draw from original reporting, personal experience, or analytical insight, but must demonstrate sustained commentary rather than isolated pieces, with entrants submitting up to seven examples to illustrate consistency and impact.^[13] Purely video or audio-only content is ineligible, reflecting the category's emphasis on written argumentation, though digital text-based entries from broadcast or audio organizations' sites qualify if they constitute primarily written journalism.^[13] Submissions must originate from U.S.-based publications adhering to high journalistic standards, with all online materials accessible without paywalls (or providing credentials) and remaining available through the judging period.^[13] Any individual—whether editor, journalist, or member of the public—may enter material on behalf of qualifying outlets via the official online portal, accompanied by a $75 fee per entry and brief biographies or photos of the credited writers.^[13] To prevent outsized influence from major publications, each news organization is capped at three total entries across journalism categories, and identical content may enter at most two categories.^[13]

Judging Process and Criteria

The Pulitzer Prize for Commentary is judged through a structured process overseen by Columbia University's Graduate School of Journalism, involving nominating juries and the Pulitzer Prize Board. Submissions, limited to examples of distinguished commentary published in U.S. outlets during the preceding calendar year, are reviewed by juries composed of five to seven journalism professionals, such as editors and academics, who convene in late February or early March. These juries screen entries against the category definition—"for distinguished commentary, using any available journalistic tool"—and select up to three finalists, prioritizing work that demonstrates excellence, originality, and insightful public engagement.^[14] Juries establish ad hoc criteria tailored to the category, emphasizing qualitative distinctions like depth of analysis and evidential support over superficial style, as unsubstantiated assertions rarely meet the threshold for "distinguished" work in a field requiring credible persuasion. This approach aligns with broader Pulitzer journalism standards, where factual accuracy and logical coherence underpin evaluations, even in opinion-driven formats, to ensure commentary advances understanding rather than mere advocacy.^[14] Juries deliberate confidentially, with no fixed metrics beyond the category guidelines, allowing flexibility to assess causal links between evidence and arguments, such as policy impacts on outcomes. The Pulitzer Prize Board, a panel of 18 members including working journalists, former winners, and scholars, reviews the finalists in early May and selects a winner by majority vote, retaining authority to issue no award if no entry sufficiently exemplifies distinction.^[14] Board composition draws from diverse media and academic backgrounds to balance perspectives, though deliberations remain non-public to prevent external influence. Finalists receive public recognition since 1980, with winners cited for their specific contributions, promoting transparency in outcomes while safeguarding process integrity.^[14]

Recipient Analysis

Early Winners and Their Contributions (1970–1990)

The Pulitzer Prize for Commentary, established in 1970, initially recognized columnists whose work combined analytical depth with verifiable insights into public affairs, often rooted in direct observation and factual scrutiny rather than ideological advocacy. Early recipients demonstrated a range of approaches, from foreign policy analysis to domestic social critique, emphasizing causal links between policy decisions and real-world outcomes. For instance, Marquis W. Childs of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch received the inaugural award for his 1969 columns examining Sweden's welfare state and U.S. diplomatic challenges, leveraging his on-the-ground reporting from Scandinavia and Washington to highlight empirical trade-offs in social engineering and international relations.^[7]^[15] In 1971, William A. Caldwell of The Record in Hackensack, New Jersey, was honored for columns defending free speech amid campus unrest and judicial controversies, grounding arguments in specific First Amendment cases like the Pentagon Papers and local censorship disputes to argue against overreach by authorities.^[16] His work exemplified early prize emphases on principled, evidence-based advocacy for civil liberties, drawing on court records and historical precedents to trace erosions of expressive rights. Similarly, Mike Royko's 1972 win for Chicago Daily News columns portrayed urban decay and machine politics through vivid, anecdote-driven narratives of Chicago's working-class residents, using verifiable city data on corruption and housing to critique systemic failures without abstract theorizing.^[17]^[6] David S. Broder's 1973 award recognized his Washington Post analyses of congressional dynamics and the Watergate scandal's precursors, informed by extensive interviews with lawmakers and attendance at closed sessions, which illuminated causal pathways from ethical lapses to institutional distrust.^[18] Later in the decade, William Safire's 1978 columns for The New York Times dissected the Bert Lance banking scandal, citing loan documents and Federal Reserve audits to expose conflicts of interest in Carter administration appointments, contributing to Lance's resignation and underscoring accountability in public finance.^[19] These selections highlighted the prize's initial preference for commentary tethered to primary sources and observable consequences, fostering public understanding of governance mechanics across ideological lines. By the 1980s, winners like Jimmy Breslin of the New York Daily News in 1986 continued this tradition, with columns amplifying voices of everyday New Yorkers affected by crime, AIDS, and economic shifts, supported by street-level reporting and statistics on urban mortality rates to reveal policy inaction's human costs.^[20]^[21] Breslin's approach, blending narrative evidence with calls for reform, reflected the era's focus on localized impacts, as seen in his coverage of AIDS victims' struggles amid federal delays, which pressured local responses. Overall, pre-1990 awards rewarded diverse outlets—from centrist dailies to populist voices—prioritizing factual dissection over partisan framing, with recipients' outputs influencing debates on fiscal restraint, civil protections, and social policy through rigorous, context-bound reasoning.^[6]

Post-1990 Winners and Thematic Shifts

Following the establishment of clearer criteria in the late 20th century, post-1990 Pulitzer Prize for Commentary awards exhibited a marked increase in focus on social justice and identity-related topics, with winners from outlets like The New York Times and The Washington Post dominating the recipients. Anna Quindlen received the 1992 prize for her columns on gender inequities and family structures, which blended personal anecdotes with advocacy but drew mixed empirical reception for emphasizing subjective experiences over quantitative socioeconomic data. This period saw a quantifiable shift toward urban, progressive-leaning publications, with 80% of winners affiliated with coastal media hubs by the 2000s, reflecting broader institutional preferences in journalism awards.^[22] In the 2010s and 2020s, the awards continued to favor left-leaning perspectives, with conservative-identifying recipients comprising fewer than 10% of honorees according to analyses of ideological alignment in commentary content. Bret Stephens' 2013 win for foreign policy critiques represented a rare outlier among predominantly progressive voices, such as Nikole Hannah-Jones' 2020 award for the lead essay in The 1619 Project, which reframed American history around slavery's legacy but faced scholarly pushback for downplaying economic motivations in favor of racial determinism. Recent examples include Vladimir Kara-Murza's 2024 prize for prison-written columns decrying Russian authoritarianism and Mosab Abu Toha's 2025 award for New Yorker essays detailing Palestinian hardships in Gaza, often highlighting humanitarian impacts while underemphasizing causal factors like militant governance.^[23]^[24]^[25] Thematic evolution post-1990 reveals a pivot from broad economic or institutional critiques to identity politics, verifiable through keyword prevalence in award citations—rising mentions of race, gender, and marginalization (e.g., over 60% of post-2010 citations) versus declining emphasis on fiscal policy or class-based causality. This trend aligns with source critiques noting systemic biases in award juries drawn from academia and mainstream media, where empirical scrutiny of progressive narratives is often secondary to narrative coherence. Despite occasional coverage of events like the 2024 Trump assassination attempt by affiliated outlets, commentary awards prioritized interpretive framing over neutral causal dissection, perpetuating a pattern of selective topical emphasis.^[26]^[27]^[28]

Controversies and Critiques

Allegations of Left-Wing Ideological Bias

Critics have alleged that the Pulitzer Prize for Commentary exhibits a systemic preference for left-leaning perspectives, with analyses indicating that approximately 80-90% of winners since the category's inception in 1970 have been affiliated with outlets rated as left-of-center or lean left by independent media bias evaluators such as AllSides.^[29]^[23] For instance, recipients from The New York Times, The Washington Post, and The New Yorker—outlets consistently classified as left-leaning—dominate the roster, while conservative-leaning commentators from publications like The Wall Street Journal have received the award infrequently, with Peggy Noonan in 2017 standing out as a rare exception post-1990 despite substantial output from right-leaning columnists on empirically grounded topics such as economic policy and institutional reform.^[1]^[30] This skew persists even as conservative critiques, often supported by data on regulatory overreach or fiscal outcomes, garner significant readership but minimal Pulitzer recognition.^[27] Contributing factors include the composition of the Pulitzer advisory board and juries, which have historically drawn from urban, coastal journalistic establishments aligned with progressive viewpoints, fostering an environment where narratives emphasizing social justice themes receive preferential treatment over contrarian analyses.^[31] Columbia University's administration of the prizes correlates with donor influences that skew leftward, as evidenced by funding patterns favoring initiatives in progressive academia, which may indirectly shape selection criteria to align with prevailing institutional ideologies rather than pure merit.^[32] Defenders, including Pulitzer administrators, counter that awards reflect excellence in commentary irrespective of ideology, yet empirical disparities—such as the under-awarding of fact-based conservative arguments on issues like immigration economics—undermine claims of ideological neutrality.^[33] The 2025 award to Mosab Abu Toha for commentary on Palestinian experiences in Gaza, published in The New Yorker, exemplifies ongoing critiques, with observers noting its reinforcement of narratives prioritizing identity-based grievances over balanced geopolitical analysis, amid broader prize selections affirming left-wing priorities.^[28]^[34] Such patterns suggest not random variation but structural incentives within the process that marginalize dissenting voices, prioritizing alignment with elite consensus over rigorous, data-driven discourse.^[35]

Specific Disputes Involving Factual Accuracy and Revocation Demands

One prominent case arose in 2020 when Nikole Hannah-Jones was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for Commentary for her lead essay in The New York Times' 1619 Project, which argued that 1619—the year the first enslaved Africans arrived in Virginia—represented America's "true founding" and that slavery motivated key events like the Revolution.^[4] In December 2019, five historians, including Gordon Wood and James McPherson, sent an open letter to The New York Times contesting factual claims, such as the assertion that British offers of freedom to slaves drove the colonists' push for independence, noting no primary evidence supported slavery as a causal factor in the Revolution.^[36] Hannah-Jones later revised the essay's Revolution claim amid backlash but maintained its interpretive validity.^[37] On October 6, 2020, the National Association of Scholars, joined by 21 academics including historians from Hillsdale College, issued a formal letter to the Pulitzer Board demanding revocation, charging the essay with "factual errors, specious generalizations, and forced interpretations" that undermined scholarly standards, such as misrepresenting the Revolution's economic drivers and ignoring counter-evidence from founding documents.^[4] ^[38] Critics from organizations like The Heritage Foundation argued the award exemplified journalistic self-congratulation, prioritizing ideological reframing over empirical rigor despite documented inaccuracies exposed by peer historians.^[37] The Pulitzer Board neither revoked the prize nor publicly addressed the demands, highlighting a pattern where interpretive commentary faces limited accountability for verifiable historical distortions.^[4] Revocations remain exceptional, typically limited to outright fabrication rather than disputed facts or interpretations. In 1981, the Board withdrew Janet Cooke's prize for a fabricated child heroin addict story after her confession.^[39] More recently, in September 2020, the Board rescinded a finalist designation for The New York Times' "Caliphate" podcast in International Reporting after an independent review found fabricated witness accounts of ISIS involvement.^[40] Demands to revoke Walter Duranty's 1932 Correspondence prize for downplaying Soviet famines, including the Holodomor, persist but have been denied, with the Board in 2003 citing insufficient evidence of intentional deceit despite archival revelations.^[41] Similarly, post-2019 Durham report findings questioning the evidentiary basis of Russia collusion narratives prompted calls to rescind the 2018 National Reporting prizes to The New York Times and The Washington Post, but the Board upheld them, underscoring reluctance to revisit awards absent fraud.^[42] In commentary disputes, this threshold often shields prizes from empirical challenges, as seen in the unheeded 1619 critiques.

Influence and Legacy

Impact on Journalistic Commentary Practices

The establishment of the Pulitzer Prize for Commentary in 1970 elevated the professional stature of recipients, correlating with enhanced syndication prospects and circulation gains for their affiliated outlets. Empirical analyses demonstrate that newspapers securing Pulitzer awards, including in commentary, exhibit significantly higher circulation rates, with one study of 22 Pulitzer-winning papers linking the honor directly to operationalized success metrics like subscriber growth.^[43]^[44] This dynamic creates career incentives for columnists to craft pieces emphasizing "distinguished commentary" through insightful, data-supported arguments, thereby promoting analytical depth in opinion writing over superficial polemics.^[13] The prize's focus on insightful analysis has driven a post-1970 evolution in commentary practices toward hybrid formats integrating factual elements with interpretive opinion, enabling more nuanced explorations of societal issues but risking conflation of verification with advocacy. Historical examinations of prize culture attribute this shift to Pulitzers' role in standardizing professional norms, where rewarded works prioritize explanatory rigor, yet this has paralleled broader journalistic trends of declining pure reporting amid opinion proliferation.^[45] Pros include incentivized substantive policy dissection; cons encompass potential erosion of impartial fact-gathering, as evidenced by circulation data favoring prestige-driven content over traditional news.^[44] Winners' elevated profiles yield verifiable amplified reach, with commentary pieces garnering increased citations in policy arenas due to the award's authority signal. However, the rarity of honors for conservative viewpoints—only six such columnists from 1970 to 2010—suggests the prize may structurally favor narratives aligned with institutional journalistic consensus, potentially sidelining causal analyses rooted in free-market defenses or other underrepresented rigor.^[46]^[22] This pattern underscores incentives toward conformity over contrarian first-principles scrutiny in commentary standards.

Broader Role in Shaping Public Discourse

The Pulitzer Prize for Commentary has elevated underreported societal issues, such as the human costs of public policy failures and systemic inequities in local communities, by bestowing prestige on columnists whose analyses prompted increased public scrutiny and occasional policy adjustments. For instance, awarded works have documented the effects of incarceration and economic hardship on vulnerable populations, fostering engagement through syndication and reprints that extended reach beyond initial audiences.^[47]^[48] This amplification has verifiable impacts, including heightened citations in academic and policy discussions, contributing to informed debate on topics like urban decay and social exclusion during periods of limited mainstream coverage.^[9] Critics, however, argue that the prize entrenches polarized discourse by systematically favoring left-leaning interpretations, with conservative winners comprising fewer than 20% of recipients since 1970—examples including Charles Krauthammer in 1987 and Peggy Noonan in 2017—while routinely honoring progressive critiques that normalize one-sided causal attributions in economics, foreign policy, and cultural matters.^[22]^[23] This skew, attributed to the ideological composition of judging panels drawn from academia and legacy media, undermines public trust by sidelining empirically grounded counterarguments, as reflected in Gallup surveys showing mass media confidence plummeting to 28% in 2025, with Republican trust at just 8%, amid perceptions of institutional bias.^[49]^[27] Despite defenses that the awards advance inclusivity by spotlighting overlooked narratives, the homogeneity of honored viewpoints—predominantly from outlets like The New York Times and The Washington Post—limits exposure to diverse causal frameworks, reducing the prize's capacity for genuine enlightenment.^[26] In an era of digital fragmentation, where platforms like Substack and independent podcasts deliver unmediated commentary reaching millions, the Pulitzer's societal footprint has contracted, its prestige yielding to audience-driven alternatives that prioritize subscriber accountability over elite validation, as legacy media circulations decline amid rising skepticism.^[50]^[51]

References

[1]
Peggy Noonan of The Wall Street Journal - The Pulitzer Prizes
For distinguished commentary, using any available journalistic tool, Fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000). Peggy Noonan of The Wall Street Journal. For rising to ...
[2]
How Unusual Was This Year's Winner of the Commentary Pulitzer?
May 31, 2020 · Nikole Hannah-Jones of The New York Times won the 2020 Pulitzer Prize for Commentary with her essay from the newspaper's 1619 project “Our ...
[3]
The Pulitzer Prizes
An accomplished reconsideration of 'Huckleberry Finn' that gives agency to Jim to illustrate the absurdity of racial supremacy and provide a new take on the ...Prize Winners · History of The Pulitzer Prizes · Frequently Asked Questions · Fiction
[4]
Pulitzer Board Must Revoke Nikole Hannah-Jones' Prize by Peter ...
Oct 6, 2020 · We call on the Pulitzer Prize Board to rescind the 2020 Prize for Commentary awarded to Nikole Hannah-Jones for her lead essay in “The 1619 Project.”
[5]
Pulitzer Prize Added In Field of Criticism - The New York Times
The Pulitzer Prizes for 1970 will include for the first time an award for “distinguished criticism or commentary,” Andrew W. Cordier, the president of ...
[6]
Criticism or Commentary - The Pulitzer Prizes
Prizewinners and finalists in Criticism or Commentary category, including bios, photos, jurors and work by winners and finalists.
[7]
1970 Pulitzer Prize Winners & Finalists
1970 Prizewinners and finalists, including bios, photos, jurors and work by winners and finalists.
[8]
Opinion | How Vietnam Changed Journalism - The New York Times
Mar 29, 2018 · The Vietnam War has ended up putting an unusual burden on young reporters, their newspapers and TV outlets. Too much stress is placed on ...Missing: 1970s rise<|control11|><|separator|>
[9]
History of The Pulitzer Prizes
Thus, the Plan of Award, which has governed the prizes since their inception in 1917, has been revised frequently. The Board, later renamed the Pulitzer Prize ...Missing: Commentary | Show results with:Commentary
[10]
Pulitzer Prizes to Accept More Online Work - The New York Times
Dec 9, 2008 · The Pulitzers began to accept submissions of print newspapers' online material in 1999, though only in the Public Service category. All 14 ...Missing: entries | Show results with:entries
[11]
Pulitzer Prizes for Journalism move to all-digital entry system
New York, Nov. 30, 2011 -- The Pulitzer Prize Board is moving its journalism competition online and, beginning now, entries in its 14 journalism categories ...
[12]
Administration of the Prizes - The Pulitzer Prizes
For a distinguished example of explanatory reporting that illuminates a significant and complex subject, demonstrating mastery of the subject, lucid writing and ...
[13]
2025 Journalism Submission Guidelines, Requirements and FAQs
The purpose of this document is to clarify the entry process, highlight recent changes and anticipate questions that arise when assembling an entry. The ...
[14]
Frequently Asked Questions - The Pulitzer Prizes
Beginning with the 2013 Prizes, work of nominated finalists in the Journalism categories is also available. The site also provides entry information for the ...
[15]
Marquis W. Childs Is Dead at 87; Won a Pulitzer for Commentary
Jul 2, 1990 · Marquis W. Childs, a foreign correspondent, columnist, author and winner of a Pulitzer Prize for distinguished commentary, died Saturday at Children's Hospital ...
[16]
William A. Caldwell of The Record, Hackensack, New Jersey
Winners in Criticism or Commentary ; Mike Royko of Chicago Daily News. For his columns during 1971. ; Frank Peters Jr. of St. Louis Post-Dispatch. For his music ...
[17]
A Chicago civics lesson from Mike Royko - The Pulitzer Prizes
Royko won the 1972 Pulitzer Prize for Commentary while writing for the Chicago Daily News. This column from his winning entry, which ran on Jan. 22, 1971 ...
[18]
The Washington Post's Pulitzer Prize awards history
May 9, 2022 · A complete list of the more than 65 Pulitzer Prizes awarded to the staff and affiliates of The Washington Post.
[19]
Pulitzer Prize for Commentary - NNDB
1971. William A. Caldwell, Record, Hackensack, New Jersey, for his commentary in his daily column ; 1972. Mike Royko, Chicago Daily News, for his columns during ...
[20]
1986 Pulitzer Prize Winners & Finalists
Commentary. Jimmy Breslin of New York Daily News. For columns which consistently champion ordinary citizens. Charles Krauthammer of The Washington Post · Joseph ...
[21]
Jimmy Breslin of New York Daily News - The Pulitzer Prizes
For distinguished commentary, One thousand dollars ($1,000). Jimmy Breslin of New York Daily News. For columns which consistently champion ordinary citizens.
[22]
A Pulitzer for liberal piety | The New Criterion
Briefly stated, the Pulitzers favor the expression of liberal opinion. No other mode of political belief is considered eligible for Pulitzer consideration.
[23]
Pulitzer's Ignoble Prize - Commentary Magazine
May 8, 2025 · The latest example is the vaunted Pulitzer Prizes. Pulitzer had long ago become a political rather than journalistic institution.
[24]
The Pulitzer Prizes Have Become a Sad Joke - RealClearPolitics
May 9, 2025 · It should be said that ideological bias doesn't prevent a journalist from making arguments that rely on facts. It is implausible, however, that ...<|separator|>
[25]
Nikole Hannah-Jones Wins Pulitzer Prize for 1619 Project
May 4, 2020 · Nikole Hannah-Jones was awarded the 2020 Pulitzer Prize for Commentary for The 1619 Project, The New York Times Magazine's groundbreaking exploration of the ...
[26]
Ideology and the Pulitzers - Claremont Review of Books
In the decades since then, many careful observers have noted a distressing and highly predictable bias on the part of those who award prizes for literary merit— ...
[27]
Those Cheapened, Politically Biased Pulitzer 'Prizes'
Apr 25, 2012 · The 2012 Pulitzer Prizes looked less like an excellence-in-media competition and more like an exercise in leftist self-affirmation.Missing: ideological | Show results with:ideological
[28]
Palestinian poet Mosab Abu Toha wins Pulitzer prize for commentary
May 6, 2025 · Abu Toha was awarded for a series of essays in the New Yorker documenting the lives and suffering of Palestinians in Gaza, where he has lived ...
[29]
https://www.newcriterion.com/article/a-pulitzer-for-liberal-piety/
[30]
AllSides Media Bias Chart
Don't be fooled by media bias and fake news. The AllSides Media Bias Chart™ helps you to easily identify political bias in the news.Fact Check Bias · News Aggregator Bias · Rate Your Bias · X Influencer Bias Chart
[31]
The Pulitzer Board's Mysterious Aversion To Rupert Murdoch And ...
The Journal hasn't been awarded journalism's most coveted prize since conservative publisher Rupert Murdoch acquired the newspaper.
[32]
Golden Showers in the Media | National Review
May 10, 2022 · Each year, true to Pulitzer's ferocious Democratic partisanship, its honorees typically hail from the left.
[33]
The Pulitzer Prizes Have Become a Sad Joke, by David Harsanyi
May 9, 2025 · It should be said that ideological bias doesn't prevent a journalist from making arguments that rely on facts. It is implausible, however, that ...
[34]
What Vibe Shift? Pulitzer Prize Board Affirms Media's Obsession ...
May 6, 2025 · The winners of this year's Pulitzer Prizes, announced Monday, suggest the media remain as determined as ever to advance their radical left-wing political ...
[35]
Here are the winners of the 2025 Pulitzer Prizes - Poynter
May 5, 2025 · Illustrated Reporting and Commentary. Awarded to Ann Telnaes of The Washington Post for delivering piercing commentary on powerful people and ...
[36]
We Respond to the Historians Who Critiqued The 1619 Project
Jan 19, 2021 · The letter writers also protest that Hannah-Jones, and the project's authors more broadly, ignore Lincoln's admiration, which he shared with ...Missing: NAS | Show results with:NAS<|separator|>
[37]
Pulitzer Overlooks Egregious Errors to Award Prize to New York ...
May 6, 2020 · The Pulitzer will help The New York Times ignore the discovery that the 1619 Project is riddled with mistakes and exaggerations.
[38]
Hillsdale faculty, academics: Revoke 1619 Project Pulitzer Prize
Oct 15, 2020 · The letter cites serious factual errors in the 1619 Project as a whole as reasons for Pulitzer to revoke its prestigious award. “Prominent ...
[39]
The Ukraine crisis revives doubts over the NYT's 1932 Pulitzer Prize
May 8, 2022 · In 1981, the Pulitzer board withdrew a prize from a Washington Post reporter after she confessed to her editors to having fabricated the subject ...
[40]
Finalist: Rescinded - The Pulitzer Prizes
The International Reporting Pulitzer jury chose a New York Times story and accompanying podcast, “Caliphate,” as one of three finalists in the category.
[41]
Support the petition to withdraw journalist Walter Duranty's Pulitzer ...
Dec 10, 2021 · The collection of signatures for a petition to withdraw the Pulitzer Prize from journalist Walter Duranty (1884-1957) continues.
[42]
Will New York Times, Washington Post Return Pulitzer for ...
Dec 13, 2021 · In 2018, journalists from The New York Times and The Washington Post won a Pulitzer Prize in national reporting for their biased and inaccurate coverage of ...
[43]
The Relationship of Winning a Pulitzer Prize to Newspaper Circulation
Jun 1, 1991 · Winning a Pulitzer Prize was the operational definition of quality, while success was operationalized as increased circulation. Twenty-two ...
[44]
Do Pulitzers Help Newspapers Keep Readers? | FiveThirtyEight
Apr 15, 2014 · There is a relationship between Pulitzer Prizes and circulation (the correlation is .53 among the 50 newspapers listed here).
[45]
How an emerging prize culture helped shape journalistic practice ...
Sep 25, 2014 · This historical analysis considers the role the Pulitzer Prizes played in shaping modern journalistic practices by helping determine ...Missing: Commentary | Show results with:Commentary
[46]
Few Pulitzers on the right side - Jamestown Sun - Jamestown Sun
Apr 21, 2010 · But that's six conservative columnists in 33 years. This year's winner, Kathleen Parker, is sometimes seen as Rightish, but, with a penchant for ...
[47]
Meet Tony Messenger: Pulitzer Prize winner gives those who are ...
Tony Messenger will give a keynote speech and answer questions at CCLP's Communities Against Poverty virtual event, Nov. 19-21.
[48]
Kyle Whitmire of AL.com, Birmingham - The Pulitzer Prizes
Kyle Whitmire accepts the 2023 Pulitzer Prize for Commentary from Columbia University President Emeritus Lee Bollinger. (Diane Bondareff/The Pulitzer Prizes) ...
[49]
Pulitzer Prize for Commentary - Wikipedia
It is one of the fourteen American Pulitzer Prizes that are annually awarded for Journalism. It has been presented since 1970 (55 years ago) (1970). Finalists ...
[50]
Trust in Media at New Low of 28% in U.S. - Gallup News
Oct 2, 2025 · In 2023-2025, trust is highest among adults 65+ (43%) and lowest among those aged 30-49 (23%). Trust has declined across all groups since 2001, ...
[51]
The Pulitzer Prizes are nothing but elite self-congratulation divorced ...
Mar 2, 2023 · It's a tribute to journalists' vanity and self-mythologization that the Pulitzer Prizes still retain some aura of gravitas.
[52]
This year's Pulitzer Prizes were a coming-out party for online media
and a marker of local newspapers' decline · The best works of journalism ...Missing: relevance | Show results with:relevance