When a mob of Trump supporters marched to the Capitol in the United States capital on January 6, 2021, reporters from the Washington Post desperate to reach their headquarters. The mobile network collapsed, the demonstrators were too numerous. Shortly after 1 p.m., reporter Rebecca Tan managed to deliver her breaking news: the demonstrators had entered the Capitol. Shortly thereafter it was clear how post Office classified the event as “an attempted coup”.
Since then, the newspaper has meticulously worked through the national trauma. She shed light on the failure of the Capitol Police, reported on the five people who died in the vicinity of the demonstration, and uncovered Donald Trump’s preparations for a putsch. More than 100 journalists worked on the topic. “Together we told the world the most important story of the past year,” said Editor-in-Chief Sally Buzbee.
For that she has post Office Received the prestigious Pulitzer Prize for Public Service, which recognizes outstanding contributions to public service. For the post Office it is the sixth of these coveted medals.
the post Office has lost about a quarter of its readership since the end of the Trump presidency, more than any other title. But she managed to shape the view of January 6th – at least in the media world and a part of the population.
“New York Times” is caught up by the past
How intensely the storming of the Capitol concerned the United States more than a year later is reflected in other prizes that have now been awarded at the 106th Pulitzer Awards: Five photographers from the Getty Images agency, for example, were honored for their pictures of that Evenings that have burned themselves into the collective memory.
Also the New York Times, which has won the most Pulitzer Prizes since 1917, received three more titles this year. However, these went down in controversy. In view of the war in Ukraine, the demand has been raised again Times should return the prize that her Moscow correspondent Walter Duranty had received in 1932. All foreign journalists were censored by the Soviets, but Duranty reported particularly favorably at the time on Joseph Stalin’s collectivization plans. When other reporters reported that Stalin was starving millions in Ukraine, Duranty glossed over and defended the dictator. According to historian Anne Applebaum, who reviewed the story, Duranty was not a communist – but wanted privileged access to Stalin and advance his career.
The dispute flares up every few decades. The award committee takes the position that it has never withdrawn an award, that would be a falsification of history. If so, have to Times they return. The NYT, on the other hand, has so far insisted that the jury is responsible. After all, it has awarded today’s Ukrainian journalists an award – “for their courage, their perseverance and their commitment to truthful reporting.”