Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

N.Y. Times agrees 1932 Pulitzer Prize was not deserved
AJC ^ | 10/23/03 | Howard Kurtz

Posted on 10/23/2003 6:32:29 AM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection

Edited on 10/29/2003 3:24:55 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]

The executive editor of the New York Times said Wednesday that the paper has no objection if the Pulitzer Prize board wants to revoke an award granted to one of its reporters 71 years ago.

Stepping into a simmering controversy over whether Walter Duranty deserved the prize for his largely favorable reporting on Joseph Stalin's Soviet Union, Bill Keller said the paper has notified the board that the Times considers Duranty's work "pretty dreadful ... It was a parroting of propaganda."


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: nytimes; pulitzer

1 posted on 10/23/2003 6:32:30 AM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Maureen...Dowd should be next.
2 posted on 10/23/2003 6:38:36 AM PDT by Roscoe Karns
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timesink
S C H A D E N F ... (oh, you know the drill)
3 posted on 10/23/2003 6:40:19 AM PDT by martin_fierro (A v v n c v l v s M a x i m v s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nuconvert; Ragtime Cowgirl; Excuse_My_Bellicosity; Pan_Yan
Fantastic!
4 posted on 10/23/2003 6:41:08 AM PDT by Pan_Yans Wife (You may forget the one with whom you have laughed, but never the one with whom you have wept.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
The executive editor of the New York Times said Wednesday that the paper has no objection if the Pulitzer Prize board wants to revoke an award granted to one of its reporters 71 years ago.

In other words, the NYT is bowing to the inevitable.

5 posted on 10/23/2003 6:41:22 AM PDT by martin_fierro (A v v n c v l v s M a x i m v s)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
How does something this simple and clearcut take months of "ongoing review"??? Do they gather in a room 8 hours a day for months at a time wondering if the guy was a mouthpiece for Stalin?? Its pretty obvious...whats to review?
6 posted on 10/23/2003 6:42:57 AM PDT by smith288 ((( () )))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
If the NYT wasn't a tool of the Stalinists for so many years, they would have long since returned this "award" (or not accepted it in the first place). The paper has been run by red-diaper New York Commie-sympathizers for as long as I can remember. The irony is that if Uncle Joe Stalin had won the Cold War (or any of his successors), people like the NYT management and owners would have been among the very first sent to the Gulag.

How stupid ARE these people?

7 posted on 10/23/2003 6:59:51 AM PDT by RANGERAIRBORNE ("Si vis pacem, para bellum"- still good advice after 2000 years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
We have just completed a 71-year investigation, and we find that "his work was clearly not prizeworthy."
8 posted on 10/23/2003 7:26:09 AM PDT by Izzy Dunne (Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help me spread by copying me into YOUR tag line.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: martin_fierro
Absolutly nothing would have be done to rectify this travesty were it not for the internet and the efforts of a few hundred people who care about the truth. Thanks and congrats to all.

I found this form letter at http://duranty.pelechm.com/

The Board of the

Pulitzer Prizes

Ladies and Gentlemen of the Board:

We urge you to revoke the Pulitzer Prize granted to Walter Duranty in 1932 for his articles in 1931 on conditions in the Soviet Union, particularly the implementation of the Five-Year Plan.

We urge this revocation for two reasons:

1. Duranty's dispatches from the Soviet Union as a full-time reporter for the New York Times from the early 1920s to 1934 and part-time till 1940 were repetitions of Soviet propaganda. Duranty covered up the excesses and crimes of the regime. The result was that large parts of the public in the West were misled about the true nature of the Soviet regime.

In June 1931, Duranty admitted to A.W. Klieforth of the US Embassy in Berlin that, "'in agreement with The New York Times and the Soviet authorities,'" his official dispatches always reflect the official opinion of the Soviet regime and not his own'. (Cited in Leonard Leshuk, US Intelligence Perceptions of Soviet Power 1921-46. London, Frank Cass Publishers, 2003). Thus by the time that he wrote the Pulitzer Prize-winning articles on the Five-Year Plan he was writing as a propagandist for the Soviet Union.

2. Duranty followed his Pulitzer Prize with even more unethical and unprofessional conduct by mostly ignoring the Famine in Ukraine and the Caucasus in 1932 and then in 1933 actively denying it and denouncing reporters who mentioned it as liars. This denial covered up the Soviet genocide of several million people.

In brief, Duranty’s dispatches were a fraud, and Duranty actively denied genocide. The refusal of previous Boards to revoke Duranty’s Prize is extremely insulting and offensive to all the nationalities that suffered and died from Joseph Stalin’s crimes, which Duranty did his utmost to conceal. We urge the Board to show ethical and professional integrity and to commemorate the 70th anniversary of the Famine of 1932-1933 by removing Walter Duranty from the ranks of those who have achieved "journalism's highest honor," as The New York Times has called the Pulitzer Prizes.

9 posted on 10/23/2003 7:32:50 AM PDT by Hoboken
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
What Duranty did was mirrored by CNN (and others) sucking up to the Iraqis for the past 10 years.
10 posted on 10/23/2003 7:36:16 AM PDT by Mr. Bird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RANGERAIRBORNE
I have never been able to figure that one out either. Those fools would be the first to go.
11 posted on 10/23/2003 7:42:42 AM PDT by dix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: RANGERAIRBORNE
Agreed, if the Slimes had any integrity, it would have returned the Duranty Pulitzer a dozen years ago, or more.
12 posted on 10/23/2003 8:07:13 AM PDT by CatoRenasci (Ceterum Censeo [Gallia][Germania][Arabia] Esse Delendam --- Select One or More as needed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Tumbleweed_Connection
Bill Keller said the paper has notified the board that the Times considers Duranty's work "pretty dreadful ... It was a parroting of propaganda."

Not much has changed at the Times. Dreadful is an apt description of their work but they have been struggling recently to create original propaganda.

13 posted on 10/23/2003 8:47:08 AM PDT by eggman (Social Insecurity - Who will provide for the government when the government provides for all of us?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pan_Yans Wife
Wow!!
14 posted on 10/29/2003 3:20:29 PM PST by Excuse_My_Bellicosity (All the good tag lines are taken......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson