1. Laurence Simon on April 7th, 2008 at 2:40 pm
   

   I agree with the Editorial Writing award.

   If only they did that more often with more categories.
2. I.P.A.Bill on April 7th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
   

   Wow - no award for editorial writing ? Now that almost everything in the paper is an editorial ? Does not say much ( or perhaps it does ) for the quality of the writeing.
3. american woman on April 7th, 2008 at 2:59 pm
   

   Laurence I agree! Is the pulitzer now a ” liberal pat each other on the back ” tool? It demeans the prize.
4. RickG on April 7th, 2008 at 3:49 pm
   

   Note the geographical sameness of the recipients? Pulitzer looks to have become a little provincial to me.
5. Fink on April 7th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
   

   Now wait a second. Doesn’t the Chronicle have a Pulitzer? The Houston Post won one and the Chron bought the Post. What happened to THAT Pulitzer? You ought to call and ask.

   Oh, and the latest photograhy winner used to to work for The Houston Post.
6. T-Hawkk on April 7th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
   

   I have a blog and I too am tied with the Houston Chronicle for number of Pulitzer Prizes.

   If my blog DOES win a Pulitzer Prize, I will toss it in a landfill, because that’s how much value I give Pulitzer Prizes in this day and age. It’s all liberal non-sense.
7. raiderdav on April 7th, 2008 at 5:14 pm
   

   The Washington Post got screwed - they really should have had at least one more. Maybe next year I guess.

   Is it possible for that paper to be THAT much better than all the others in the country? The Pulitzer committee should really start expanding their borders.
8. Matt Bramanti on April 7th, 2008 at 5:35 pm
   

   If my blog DOES win a Pulitzer Prize, I will toss it in a landfill, because that’s how much value I give Pulitzer Prizes in this day and age.

   I’d cash the check first.
9. texpat on April 7th, 2008 at 5:49 pm
   

   Michael Ramirez of Investors’ Business Daily winning the Pulitzer ? Holy cow, man, that alone is reason to rejoice !
10. Ken Kelley on April 7th, 2008 at 8:34 pm
    

    #1 & #3:
    Let’s face it: the Pulitzer prizes are of no value in determining someone’s worth. (Arafat? Gore? Oh, please!!!)
    And this round of “journalism” awards just tells us, once again, that if you don’t fit the template, you don’t get the gold star.
    They are all totally worthless.

    – Ken
11. T-Hawkk on April 8th, 2008 at 12:08 am
    

    wait a second…. I know the Nobel Prize pays out about a hundred grand or so…. I’d take that, sure. I didn’t know the Pulitzer paid….

    I think some are confusing the Nobel Peace Prize (Arafat, Gore) and the Pulitzer….
12. Gavin on April 9th, 2008 at 7:05 am
    

    If you’re looking for an interesting read about the Chronicle check out this link http://www.aboutseafood.com/media/NFI_Challenges_Houston_Chronicle.cfm. The Chronicle ripped off a story from the New York Times about supposedly dangerous levels of mercury in sushi and then got some of the facts wrong. The National Fisheries Institute has publically called them on it and they are essentially refusing to correct their mistakes.
13. Gavin on April 9th, 2008 at 7:18 am
    

    If that link doesn’t work try this one http://www.aboutseafood.com/media/NFI_Challenges_Houston_Chronicle.cfm
    or go to http://www.aboutseafood.com and check the media page.

Feel free to leave a comment...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!

You must be logged in to post a comment.