Monday, I reported on a June 5, 2006 blog post/op-ed published at RealClearPolitcs.com, where Thomas Lipscomb is described as having been “nominated for a Pulitzer for his reporting on Kerry during the 2004 elections.”
Although, fellow wing-nut Dan at RiehlWorld, attempts to back up Lipscomb (while attacking me), this appears to be a complete fabrication as to claim Lipscomb was a prestigious “nominee” appears to only mean that someone — anyone can fill out an entry form and sent it to Pulitzer, per documents off the official Pulitzer web site…
Per the “Terminology” section at the official Pulitzer web site ( www.pulitzer.org), there is no such thing as being a “nominee” for the Pulitzer. The only two categories are:
1. “Pulitzer Prize Winner “(which is self-explanatory; and
2. “Nominated Finalist.” (Of which there are three, all announced publicly.)
Per the Pulitzer:
“Work that has been submitted for Prize consideration but not chosen as either a nominated finalist or a winner is termed an entry or submission. No information on entrants is provided.” [Emphasis in original]
The Pulitzer’s historical listing of winners and nominated finalists and the search function show that Lipscomb has never been a nominated finalist or winner of a Pulitzer prize for anything in any year.
Again, I repeat, anyone at all who has had something published in a United States newspaper can submit their work to the Pulitzer Prize Board for consideration in the relevant category, but that does not make them a qualified “nominated finalist.” Indeed, an entry form can be downloaded right from Pulitzer.org (here’s a copy — I think I might submit my own work, so I can be a nominee too). Self-submissions are allowed.
So just how does that kooky Thomas Lipscomb claim he was “nominated for a Pulitzer”? Because some right-wingnut somewhere on Earth sent in an entry form to the Pulitzer Prize Board attaching Lipscomb’s so-called “reporting” on John Kerry?
By that standard, Lipscomb’s also probably a Publishers Clearing House jackpot winner! (But, Lipscomb shouldn’t count on Ed McMahon knocking on his basement door with a giant check anytime soon!)
Lying about a credential is a huge deal in journalism — it just goes without saying — ask Jayson Blair, who was fired from the NY Times in part because he exaggerated his resume. As the NY Times wrote:
“When he was hired, Times officials assumed he had graduated, but college officials say he has a year of course work left to complete, the Times reported.” (NYT, 5/11/03)
And, then there’s writer and historian Joseph Ellis — who lied about time spent in Vietnam, exaggerating his resume, and was roundly humiliated for it.
Or, take the recent controversy over James Frey who pitched his “Million Little Pieces” as a memoir and was destroyed because it actually included fictitious information.
It’s time for Thomas Lipscomb to face the music, too.
If Dan at RiehlWorld, “had enough insight or intelligence,” he’d be backing off his support of Lipscomb — unless of course, Dan was the right-wing nutjob who “nominated” Lipscomb.
Meanwhile, I stand by my earlier piece about Lipscomb, who is nothing but a partisan conservative propagandist, hack and shill for right-wing and the “Swift Boat” liars. One has to wonder how much the SBL’s paid Lipscomb for all his hack job’s he put in print around various right-wing publications and blogs?
And, folks concerned about journalistic integrity should contact the Digitial Center at the Annenberg School for Communication at USC, where Lipscomb is listed as a Senior Fellow, and let them know that Lipscomb is a disgrace to their organization — firstname.lastname@example.org