In 2018 The Pulitzers gave journalism prizes to reporters from the New York Times and Washington Post for their “Russia collusion” pieces:
Staffs of The New York Times and The Washington Post
For deeply sourced, relentlessly reported coverage in the public interest that dramatically furthered the nation’s understanding of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and its connections to the Trump campaign, the President-elect’s transition team and his eventual administration. (The New York Times entry, submitted in this category, was moved into contention by the Board and then jointly awarded the Prize.)
You know what happened with that “Russia collusion” narrative that the Hillary Clinton campaign was behind, and as a result the Pulitzers received complaints and decided to launch a review.
The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway has passed along the results of the probes, and you most likely won’t be surprised:
Even as media credibility craters, Pulitzers are doubling down on the awards they gave to propagandists for perpetrating the false, dangerous, and damaging Russia collusion hoax. https://t.co/gJuRpV5b6c
— Mollie (@MZHemingway) July 18, 2022
The Pulitzer Prize Board’s press release about the results of reviews of winning entries in 2018 is simply amazing, though frankly not very surprising:
The Pulitzer Prize Board has an established, formal process by which complaints against winning entries are carefully reviewed. In the last three years, the Pulitzer Board has received inquiries, including from former President Donald Trump, about submissions from The New York Times and The Washington Post on Russian interference in the U.S. election and its connections to the Trump campaign–submissions that jointly won the 2018 National Reporting prize.
These inquiries prompted the Pulitzer Board to commission two independent reviews of the work submitted by those organizations to our National Reporting competition. Both reviews were conducted by individuals with no connection to the institutions whose work was under examination, nor any connection to each other. The separate reviews converged in their conclusions: that no passages or headlines, contentions or assertions in any of the winning submissions were discredited by facts that emerged subsequent to the conferral of the prizes.
The 2018 Pulitzer Prizes in National Reporting stand.
Recommended
Basically that statement is “sure what they were reporting as fact turned out to be false but they thought it was true at the time so good enough for us!”
Consider them a prize for “getting Trump”
— Gettr and Truth Social handle @DaveWNC (@dweinberger66) July 18, 2022
The stories fueled the preferred narrative at the time and that’s all that mattered.
And they wonder why we don’t believe their lies https://t.co/cQRYERmIGf
— T Lee (@iTW333) July 18, 2022
Count NBC News’ Katy Tur among “journalists” who are just baffled as to why so many people don’t trust the media.
The Pulitzer Prize admitting it had been corrupted by the Dems & woke politics. https://t.co/h1pbVyN7Mr
— Kali (@Kali27662578) July 18, 2022
We didn’t expect them to humble themselves did we? https://t.co/RiX1wOa7qr
— Kristi Leigh (@KristiLeighTV) July 18, 2022
Not at all.
***
Related:
Join the conversation as a VIP Member