Always a late entry in the continuous flow of photographic awards, the Pultizer is still a very a very, very honorable one to receive. Mainly because it is one of the oldest ( the oldest ?), but also because it is so tied with sister, the written press. This year’s crop has made no discovery of young talented 20 year old who grabbed his camera and got the scoop of the year. None of that. Rather, the jury went for established professionals with years of industry background and strong financial backing. Is that wrong ? Not at all. photography should not be about who you are, how you did it, but about what you show: the photograph.
This year’s winners also show that while newspapers might be a dying breed, newspaper photogrpahers are certainly not. They still photograph world events with the same passion and commitment as ever.
That is exactly what the venerable Pulitzer showed this year . One little thing, however : Can someone redesign the site so it does look and feel it was made in the 70’s ? especially, can we make a little effort to display the photographic winners a tad better ?
See winners here : Breaking News : Pulitzer