Scott Gillespie

I've written before how vested the Star Tribune has become in trying to win a Pulitzer or two from the paper's coverage of the I-35W bridge collapse. To summarize, bridge collapse coverage is perhaps the only shot the current generation of editors and reporters at the paper will have at vying for a Pulitzer. It's unlikely (God willing) that our state will ever again suffer such a freak tragedy in public infrastructure where 13 lives were lost. The paper, particularly in the immediate aftermath of the collapse, did extraordinary work under the leadership of then-managing editor Scott Gillespie, who directed the Star Tribune to "flood the zone" in its coverage.

At first blush, winning a Pulitzer would seem to be good not only for Minnesota's largest newspaper (and thus our state's de facto paper of record) but also for Minnesotans' collective civic pride. But not for Minnesota Republicans, particularly those serving in Gov. Tim Pawlenty's Administration, like MnDOT Commissioner Carol Molnau and her top staff. As I've also written before, some reporters at the paper have crossed civil lines in trying to find what is tried-and-true Pulitzer Prize clinching material: Government malfeasance or neglect. To date, Star Tribune reporters have yet to find a MnDOT Deep Throat or damning conduct in the gazillion documents they've acquired in dozens of Minnesota Data Practices Act requests.

But harassing MnDOT employees is not the only objection MnDOT has to the Star Tribune's bridge collapse coverage. The Department maintains that the Star Tribune has been playing fast and loose with lots of facts in many of its stories. So, MnDOT has been keeping a file documenting every fact that it deems the Star Tribune has gotten wrong. My sources tell me the file has become inches high...and that MnDOT plans to make sure the Pulitzer Prize Board receives it.

I asked PIM staffer Dan Feidt to call the Pulitzer Prize office at Columbia University. He was told that there isn't any formal mechanism for challenges against a Pulitzer candidate submission, but the Pulitzer committee asks the newspapers to include challenges and complaints about their coverage with the exhibits they submit to be considered for prizes. The unidentified Pulitzer staffer said, "That's part of our rules, and challenges are intended to be presented to the judges alongside the offered articles."

The operative language in the Pulitzer Prize submission forms reads: "Any significant challenge to the honesty, accuracy or fairness of an entry, such as published letters, corrections, retractions, as well as responses by the newspaper, should be included in the submission." [Emphasis mine.]

One reasonable interpretation of this requirement would seem to preclude the Star Tribune from having to submit the MnDOT "error" file. We trust MnDOT will send that file directly to the Pulitzer Board, the members of which determine the recipients of the prizes.

Since I first wrote this story for last week's PIM Weekly Report, MnDOT apparently has decided to make sure the Star Tribune Pulitzer prize submission includes the Department's objections. Yesterday, the Star Tribune published a commentary piece by MnDOT Assistant Commissioner Bob McFarlin, the "Star Tribune served readers poorly with MnDOT series," in which McFarlin writes that the paper has been "parsimonious with the complete facts."

There's another interesting wrinkle for the Star Tribune in next year's Pulitzer awards. Former Star Tribune editor, now Miami Herald executive editor Anders Gyllenhaal, still sits on the Pulitzer Board, and will be voting on the prizes. Current Star Tribune editor Nancy Barnes was first hired for a lesser job at the paper by Gyllenhaal when he was editor.

[Note on the Pulitzer links: There is only one link for the whole site.]

"Lobbying" campaigns against Pulitzer Prize awards, by the way, are not unprecedented. A few examples are here, here and here.