Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Alternative Pulitzer

By G. Pascal Zachary, AlterNet. Posted April 7, 2005.


The Pulitzer Prize for investigative reporting is a reminder of the importance of alternative weekly newspapers and the continuing tendency for monopoly newspapers to pursue profit or behind-the-scenes influence.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

The announcement of the Pulitzer Prizes usually provoke yawns -- or even sneers -- from media critics. The biggest of the American journalism prizes, the Pulitzers annually ratify conventional wisdom with overwhelmingly safe selections. Prizes are often given to the pooh-bahs from the top daily newspapers, allowing them to burnish their resumes and giving their employers free rein to promote the notion, however committed they are to profit, that they also serve the public good.

And that's largely what happened earlier this week, when the Pulitzer board announced this year's winners. The usual suspects -- the L.A Times, The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal -- were named, with one exception. For only the fifth time in the history of the prizes, an alternative weekly was named a winner. The paper, Willamette Week, in Portland, Ore., won the investigative reporting category for an astonishing series of reports on a former governor's long cover-up of sexual misconduct with a teenage girl.

The Willamette Week's report on former Gov. Neil Goldschmidt, written by Nigel Jaquiss, was explosive. Goldschmidt, until the story broke, was considered the most powerful man in the state. Even more astonishing than Goldschmidt's misbehaviors was the cover-up. In a separate article, published last December, Jaquiss describes a tight-knit group of elite Oregonians who knew enough about Goldschmidt's problem to have done something about it. But they didn't.

As one person told the reporter, you could argue that he had an ethical responsibility to act against Goldschmidt but other people had an even greater responsibility to act and didn't, so why should he?

One of those other non-actors, as it turned out, was Oregon's largest daily newspaper, the Oregonian, which had a chance to reveal the cover-up but inexplicably did not. In November 2003, after Goldschmidt was appointed to the Oregon State Board for Higher Education, one of his former staffers met with the Oregonian's senior political writer and gave him the name of Goldschmidt's victim, a chronology of the cover-up and the names of others who could confirm the story.

There's no evidence that the Oregonian ever looked into the tip -- until Willamette Week prepared its own expose. Then on the eve of publication, the daily and the former governor worked together to blunt the charges -- a strategy that ultimately failed to protect his reputation or deny the Willamette Week credit for its scoop.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

G. Pascal Zachary has been a journalist for 25 years, including nearly 13 years as a senior writer for The Wall Street Journal. He is currently senior writer at Time Inc.’s monthly magazine, Business 2.0, and a lecturer in the communications department at Stanford University. He also contributes to many publications, including (most recently) The New Republic, World Policy Journal, The New York Times and The San Francisco Chronicle.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Media and Technology! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View: