Yesterday, the New York Times’ Maureen Dowd won the Pulitzer Prize for Commentary. Dowd wrote incoherent columns that rode the incredibly tiresome Clinton impeachment for all it was worth all year. Her writing is bad, her lack of interesting thoughts is profound, and the level of vitriol in her columns is downright disturbing. If the Pulitzer Prizes were awarded for the writing which best typifies the American media, then truly Dowd would have been deserving, but for an award that professes to document “intellectual and artistic excellence,” this is a sham.
The Washington Post won a Pulitzer for their excellent series examining the rate of shootings by police officers in Washington DC. This series was an example of journalism at its best, as it immediately resulted in some changes in how the police department operates.