Who wins in journalism?

This piece originally came from The Front Page, our twice-monthly newsletter on that examines systems of power and inequity in journalism. Subscribe here.

Today marked the announcement of this year’s George Polk Awards, the first of their kind to recognize reporting across media. Among the crop of winners are a strike-breaking collaboration between the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and ProPublica and the New York Times for its “unsurpassed coverage of the war between Israel and Hamas.” 

The Times, according to an analysis from The Intercept, was among several U.S. news outlets whose coverage showed a pattern of overemphasizing Israeli deaths while de-emphasizing Palestinian ones, particularly through its use for emotive language for the former but not the latter.

There’s also more irony afoot: Polk, the awards’ titular namesake, was a CBS correspondent murdered during his coverage of the Greek civil war in 1948. And according to the Committee to Protect Journalists, the ongoing Israeli bombardment of Gaza has been the most deadly conflict for journalists since the nonprofit first began tracking data in 1992. 

While the series between Post-Gazette and ProPublica journalists contained hard-hitting reporting, it’s still coverage that crossed a picket line and ignored calls from both newsrooms’ unions to work with striking workers to, for example, host the series on their strike publication website, The Pittsburgh Union Progress. (The Objective covered this in October 2023.)

Both awardees underscore bigger questions about the structure of journalism awards — who gets rewarded, what the prestige means when ethical questions are raised about the work, and how those awards impact who gets opportunities to continue working in the industry. 

Besides good work, awards in journalism rely primarily on two factors: Knowledge and payment. Reporters first have to know about the awards existing, and then, for the vast majority of competitions, pay to submit an application. If they’re freelancers, or if their newsroom has limited funds, they’re left to shoulder the burden themselves. 

There are a growing number of awards programs that offer free entry, chief among them NYU’s American Journalism Online Awards.

But when accolades provide justification for hiring or greenlighting a new project, especially from freelancers who haven’t been able to get one of the dwindling full-time staff positions at a newsroom or whose background means they don’t have the same industry relationships, it’s just another way journalism is pay-to-play. 

Good journalism isn’t and shouldn’t be premised on how many awards a piece wins. One community member feeling seen through a resource guide or reflective story carries impact. So does an exposé that upends an organization or process.

And scores of thoroughly vetted pieces and thoughtful outlets have received awards. But due to the often prohibitive and opaque process of winning them, those prizes don’t always indicate or encompass the entirety of good work that’s being done. Sometimes, they can obscure it.

James Salanga is the co-executive director of The Objective.

This piece was edited and copy edited by Gabe Schneider.

We depend on your donation. Yes, you...

With your small-dollar donation, we pay our writers, our fact checkers, our insurance broker, our web host, and a ton of other services we need to keep the lights on.

But we need your help. We can’t pay our writers what we believe their stories should be worth and we can’t afford to pay ourselves a full-time salary. Not because we don’t want to, but because we still need a lot more support to turn The Objective into a sustainable newsroom.

We don’t want to rely on advertising to make our stories happen — we want our work to be driven by readers like you validating the stories we publish are worth the effort we spend on them.

Consider supporting our work with a tax-deductable donation.

DONATE & HELP THE OBJECTIVE BECOME SUSTAINABLE

James Salanga,

Editorial Director