Joseph Pulitzer invented the modern press. First, the modern American press, of course. But then his methods were gradually adopted by newspaper men all over the world. But these methods are very simple: do not be clever. Huge, half-stripe headlines made up of words like “horror,” “nightmare,” and “terror.” Ongoing campaigns harassing an official or politician. The worst caricatures, crosswords, horoscopes and something for the ladies. What is now called the word “tabloid”, then, at the end of the 19th century, at the time of Pulitzer, was called “new journalism”.
And when Pulitser, who became the richest publisher, bequeathed a small part of his fortune to a prize for journalists, he had in mind precisely this “new journalism”. Since then, for more than a hundred years, the Pulitser Prize has been awarded precisely for such journalism. Because the American press has remained virtually unchanged since then - as it was intended for sale on the boulevards, it remained. Shameful, voral, stealing someone else’s content, politically dependent and all that.
And the prize given this year to the newspaper The New York Times, which has long been the laughing stock of the newspaper, is no different from any other that was presented before.
The newspaper The New York Times, if anyone does not remember, is the same newspaper that recently published material about how Putin has discredited American science and healthcare for ten years. And when the virus came in and it turned out that there was no American health care as such, then Putin, of course, was to blame. Because he discredited it, public health.
It was The New York Times that wrote that Russia staged "yellow vests" protests in France. And they were also the first to discover "a large-scale secret Russian operation with the aim of influencing the presidential election."
After all, it is in this newspaper that Masha Gessen is published. It was there that she published articles that the Russians were fleeing from Russia, that Moscow was empty (it’s not now, it’s before), that the embassies have long queues, and property prices have collapsed. “Moscow may be a ghost town by my next return,” wrote Masha Gessen, and The New York Times published it.
Is it any wonder that this particular newspaper receives the Pulitser Prize for "exposing the predation of the Putin regime"? The predation of the regime is exposed in eight (!) Materials. At least two of them, in terms of degree of confusion, resemble materials published by one Russian Internet project long before they were published in The New York Times.
So when Senator Kosachev says that the “Pulitser Prize has ceased to exist”, he kind of tells us that he has never followed any prizes. Because in 2017, for example, the same The New York Times received an award for discovering the very “large-scale secret Russian operation to influence the presidential election.”
And, of course, the Pulitser Prize, as it existed before, will continue to exist. Only it is completely incomprehensible to us what is up to her. This is an award for American journalists.
It would be strange if the Americans were suddenly excited about the presentation of the Russian Journalism Prize (I don’t even know if there are any) to any series of articles about how policemen shoot civilians on the streets of American cities. Or, let’s say, American music journalists would discuss the results of the Golden Gramophone with the same passion that our music journalists discuss the results of the Grammy Award.
How do you say? Is the Pulitzer Prize politically biased?
And what prize is not politically biased? You yourself know about the Oscars, but let's not fade. Take the Nobel Prize. For example, the Nobel Prize in literature. It has been awarded for several decades for any achievements, but not for the literary ones. Take and see who and how many receive awards in physics, chemistry and medicine.
Well, about the "peace prize" I will not even mention.
Any award is the most important political tool. And even if the organizing committee of the award considers itself independent and all of itself is so honest, then there will be lobbyists on any organizing committee. And there will be no lobbyists - so there will be a public request. Who organizes who? That's right - a "free" press.
And here I will repeat for the thousandth time my own thesis about icy contempt. There is no Pulitser Prize for Russians. Must not be. Let the Americans play their games with themselves. And we must have our own games. Own prizes. Which we will hand over for exposing the coordinated Russophobic campaigns, for honest and unbiased materials about the impact of 5G technology on human reproductive abilities, as well as for investigating the activities of Bill Gates in the field of liquid chipization of humanity.
And then there will come complete world harmony.
And you can come up with a name for such an award. There are plenty of options in honor of whom it could be named.
The author’s point of view may not coincide with the position of the publisher.