LTE: Pulitzer judges were journalism's second string

April 11, 2005
Cleveland Plain Dealer

As The Plain Dealer's paroxysms of elation over Connie Schultz's Pulitzer Prize slowly abate, it is instructive to look at exactly who it was that made the award to her.

Seven judges decided the prize for newspaper commentary. Four were women. Females have a tendency to relate to those needing a helping hand, so that explains why the judges liked the fact that Schultz's columns "provided a voice for the underdog and underprivileged."

Let's look at the credentials of the judging panel: The four women were an associate editor of the Houston Chronicle, the editor of the Wisconsin State Journal, the editor of the Buffalo News and an assistant professor of journalism at Columbia University. The three men were executive editors at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, the Keene (N.H.) Sentinel, and the Anniston (Ala.) Star. That isn't exactly a pantheon of journalism luminaries.

Quite illuminating is what John Simon, theater critic of New York Magazine, had to say about award competitions. In an interview at Broadway.com, Simon said: "I've always thought the Pulitzer was the worst prize in existence, and I've said it to one of the Pulitzers himself. . . . Let's face it - all prizes, starting with the Nobel, are questionable. But some are worse than questionable. Some are appalling."

Ronald Khol
Lyndhurst

Related Story:
Plain Dealer columnist wins Pulitzer for, in part, commentary bashing OhioCCW