All The Lies Fit To Print: NY Times 1932 Pulitzer Could Be Revoked

WorldNetDaily ^ | June 10, 2003 | Unattributed

[Seti 1]

ALL THE LIES FIT TO PRINT
N.Y. Times 1932 Pulitzer could be revoked
Award to reporter who ignored Stalin's atrocities under review

Posted: June 10, 2003

Amid a devastating reporting scandal in the wake of which two top editors have resigned, the New York Times faces the possible loss of its 1932 Pulitzer Prize.

Times reporter Walter Duranty won the award more than 70 years ago for his reporting on the Soviet Union under Josef Stalin's communist regime. But several Ukranian-American groups, as part of their commemoration of the 70th anniversary of the Ukranian Famine, are asking the Pulitzer board to revoke Duranty's award, arguing that the correspondent's sympathy for Stalin caused Duranty to ignore millions of deaths.

Indeed, the Pulitzer board is considering doing just that, reports the New York Sun. In April, the committee launched a review of Duranty's work.

Malcolm Muggeridge, the celebrated author and journalist, was one of the few able to get into the famine-ravaged lands of the U.S.S.R. and report on what he saw during that era. Later, Muggeridge described Duranty as "the greatest liar of any journalist I have met in 50 years of journalism."

Critics have long said that because of Duranty's manipulation of the news to placate Soviet authorities – especially Stalin – the scope of horror wrought by the communists in the pre-war U.S.S.R. was not fully comprehended until many years later. As a result, the public could not really gauge what communism was capable of, and what kind of man Stalin actually was. Robert Conquest's book "Harvest of Sorrow" and B.J. Taylor's "Stalin's Apologist" dissect Duranty's alleged journalistic misdeeds.

Ignored the deaths of millions

Josef Stalin

Stalin's man-made famine of 1932-33 was perhaps the largest mass killing in human history, likely surpassing even Hitler's extermination campaigns. It stretched from the Ukraine to Kazakstan in Central Asia – nearly 2,000 miles. Despite the extent and barbarity of the campaign, however, it didn't provoke Duranty to action.

The ongoing struggle between the Moscow government and small farmers in various regions who resisted collectivization of the land led to Stalin's planned famine, to force his will on those regions, as well as to destroy Ukrainian nationalism.

In reality, the great terror-famine wasn't caused by poor harvests or inadequate food supplies. In fact, during the 1932-33 famine the Soviet Union actually exported food.

Publicity regarding the famine would have damaged the image of the U.S.S.R., Stalin, and the spread of communism.

When occasionally reports of the famine were actually published in the Western press, contradicting reports quickly neutralized the original report and diluted their effect. Of all those involved in famine disinformation, Duranty, as Moscow correspondent for the prestigious New York Times, proved one of the most useful.

In 1932, Duranty wrote that there was no famine, nor "is there likely to be." Yet in September 1933, Duranty detailed to British diplomats how many had died and where: The North Caucasus and Lower Volga had lost 3 million people in the past year; Ukraine lost 4 to 5 million, and the total, Duranty stated, could be as high as 10 million.

For years, the media watchdog group Accuracy in Media has sought to set the record straight regarding Duranty, his reporting and his Pulitzer – the most coveted and honored award in journalism. A.I.M. approached both the Times and the Pulitzer Prize administrator about the issue. In a 1999 letter, Reed Irvine, chairman of A.I.M., pointed out that Duranty received special favors from Stalin's government, including a car and a mistress, designed to ensure the correspondent's cooperation.

Stating, "Trust in journalists and the media is at a low ebb," Irvine challenged the Pulitzer Prize administrator to meet the same standard as the National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences. In 1992 the Academy revoked a 1989 Grammy given to a musical group that later was found not actually to have sung its own lyrics.

No action was taken on the Duranty case at that time.

In the Pulitzer Prize's 86 years of existence, no award has ever been revoked, said an Associated Press account of the current review by the Pulitzer board. The Washington Post surrendered Janet Cooke's 1991 award voluntarily after she admitted fabricating stories.

Michael Sawkiw Jr., president of the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America, said more than 15,000 postcards and thousands more letters and e-mails were sent to the Pulitzer Board.

"Exactly like Jayson Blair, the heart of all this is journalistic integrity and ethics," Sawkiw told AP, referring to the disgraced Times reporter who falsified and plagiarized dozens of stories.

"Like any significant complaint, we take them seriously," Sig Gissler, the Pulitzer board administrator, responded in the AP account. "They are under review by a board subcommittee, and all aspects and ramifications will be considered."

[Seti 1]

The more things change....

[Graewoulf]

Ping.

[MEG33]

Thank heavens one reporter can no longer shape our nations views.I think many communists of the day in America had no idea the scope and extent of the atrocities.The idealized version of the perfect society flunked the history exam!

[Zavien Doombringer]

I don't think Jayson Blair was even a gleam in anyones eye at this time, why remove a distinguished award from yesterday because of a couple people today. let it stay...

[rvoitier]

I heard this morning that even though the outright lies were acknowledged, the committee will not recind the award because they didn't want to "change history."

[MEG33]

Read the History of this lying jerk.Blair is a gnat.Duranty was admired and worshipped as a Soviet authority.The citizens of the Ukraine are the ones who want the award revoked.It has been going on for years and has nothing to do with todays NYT resignations.1932 was a long time ago.

[Ditter]

I never thought I would live to see this, the NYT taken down a peg. I know people who believe the NYT, over the Bible. I'll bet they are in severe distress right now.

[Navy Patriot]

I heard this morning that even though the outright lies were acknowledged, the committee will not recind the award because they didn't want to "change history."

It won't change history, the history that communists are historically liars and criminals against humanity, and are the death of civilization and humanity itself (unless we make them dead first).

[gitmogrunt]

"Thank heavens one reporter can no longer shape our nations views any longer."

Pardon me if this is a little sharp, but,where the hell have you been the last 40 years or so? I strongly disagree with that sentence.

Reporter/the media,print and TV, are always trying to influence public opinion, to the left, even now.

[MEG33]

Why is it when I goof up a post I always see it again?LOL(scratch the any longer)I said one reporter.I said no longer (today).I believe there are too many voices now for there to be a" most trusted man in America" anchor.The paper of record has egg on its face.The internet gives us a way to cross check and books are written about media bias.People are better able to filter the bias.Bias is there but we are more savvy.

[OldCorps]

What you say is true about the commies. However, read up on history between 1914 and 1945. YOu might be surprised to learn that

1) the NYT sent a commie reporter (Reed) to cover events in Russia during the reign of Tsar Nicholas II. I am shocked that his reporting was pro communist. This lead to funding of Lenin from people in the US who were, ahem, progressive. You might be surprised to learn that a large part of the funding of the Russian revolution and the subsequent murder of millions of Russians was provided by US citizens.

2) No one seems to notice that FDR had several communist sympathizers in his administration (including his wife). It was FDR who coined the phrase of Stalin as Uncle Joe. Do a little research. You will find that the origin of all big government in the US originated under him.

3) Current revisionist history holds that communist witch hunts occurred during the 50's. You might be surprised to learn that in fact, quite a few were in positions of the US government. THe liberal media sank their teeth into Sen. McCarty's behavior to discredit the central idea he advanced: that the communists had indeed penetrated the US government.

4) Take a look at popular media reporting during the 30's. You will see pro soviet and pro Stalin propaganda. This is all the more incredible when you realize that the US government and media knew of the starvation in the Ukraine, of Stalin's purges, of the liquidation of the "kulaks", of Stalins murder of Russian Orthodox clergy. However, the reality did not fit with the pro communist media spin at the time...nor does it to this day.

[RJL]

I don't think Jayson Blair was even a gleam in anyones eye at this time, why remove a distinguished award from yesterday because of a couple people today. let it stay...

For years, the media watchdog group Accuracy in Media has sought to set the record straight regarding Duranty, his reporting and his Pulitzer… A.I.M. approached both the Times and the Pulitzer Prize administrator about the issue. In a 1999 letter, Reed Irvine, chairman of A.I.M., pointed out that Duranty received special favors from Stalin's government, including a car and a mistress, designed to ensure the correspondent's cooperation.

This has nothing to do with Jayson Blair. As the article shows, AIM has been working on this since at least 1999.

How distinguished is an award that was awarded to a journalist who was being bribed to cover up the deaths of ten million people?

Removing the Pulitzer from Duranty and the New York Times is the correct action to take.

[MEG33]

Alger Hiss was at Roosevelt's side at Yalta.

[Zavien Doombringer]

Seeing that I am not to familiar with Duranty, I just found it very suspicious that after the Times scandals, we hear this. After looking deeper I see that some inquiring needs to be done in that scandal.

[bassmaner]

bump

[liberalnot]

several months ago the print edition of the nyt listed their pulitizers.

and duranty's was there! i couldn't believe it.

the holocaust industry still ignores stalin but promotes hitler.

[MEG33]

Thanks for your excellent post.

[2 Kool 2 Be 4-Gotten]

Jayson Blair is the camel's nose that might let the Walter Duranty camel into the tent. Blair is small potatoes compared to Duranty. If the Pulitzer gets revoked this will be send the signal that the lies have been systemic and about things that truly matter. The old gray lady will be truly seen to be the old gray whore.

[OldCorps]

Thanks,

The irony is that I am the scion of liberals who love FDR. However, when i was a cadet at West Point in the late 70's, the scales fell from my eyes in regard to the liberal media.

At the time, the NYT covered events (mostly puff pieces about "how swimingly well the integration of women is occuring at the military academy"). The reporting of the NYT on these event of which I had personal knowledge had little basis in reality and was very inaccurate.

This was all the more unpalatable because we were forced to subscibe to the NYT and to read it every day. So, yes, I've had my fill of liberal propaganda shoved down my throat.

Of all the institutions in the US, I think the press is the lowest. In my military career, I can't really recall the media reporting a story accurately of which I had personal knowledge.

[MEG33]

My parents loved Roosevelt,too!They weren't liberals,though.I have had an education on the internet as I can check out news from the world and the resources are endless!I am very fearful of the left,communists,socialists,progressives,greens or whatever the flavor of the day in utopian thing that leads to tyranny.