tv Book Discussion on Pulitzers Gold CSPAN April 16, 2016 4:00pm-5:11pm EDT
readership, the same people who might have enjoyed "all the president's men," who might have liked how journalists worked at their very peak. what i found was that very little has been written about these prizes. it is interesting, because you would expect the pulitzer would be well known, but the stories of how these articles were written is not known. and all the presidents men is the exception. everybody knows a lot about them. i did have to do a chapter on it, because it was a public service a winner. and i got to spend some time with bob woodward and bradley. but it was the lesser-known stories during those years, where i found the real treasure. the first prize of went for the
coverage of world war i. and it showed how newspaper journalism has been playing a role of exposing problems. in the early years, there is very little of that. newspapers were still growing period.he journalism they would do this again great on in the early years -- ag ainst great on in the early -- odds in the early years. post eventually exposed on the -- ponzy. reflected howrs they dealt with the dust bowl. and they talk about little rock in the 1950's. in another example, out of left
field, a vicious cult from california in the 1970's. from 1930 on, i was able to buy journalists that were involved in these projects. even journalists as far back as --into they felt like other journalists, the stories behind the stories had never been told before. coincidence, when i was working on this project. extraordinary cases that were happening in boston. one, the winter 2007, the wall first --urnal one is
at howirst, looking executives were backdating stock options. in the other was the 2002 work of the globe spotlight seem to expose the year-long -- years youngover-up of how people were abused by priests. i was amazed to find that nobody had told that story behind the story indicating me a chance to meet the spot line team -- spotlighting. that story however, was as we will hear about, was rudely interrupted by another story that was to win the cold pulitzer prize , 9/11. that was a very local story, regional story, and national
story and it was the new york times that when the next year for their coverage and integration of the nation challenge. what they invented to help handle the issue. when in it, portraits of grief. the study of terrorism victims. in the spotlight stories, i met sasha and i discovered her contributions. each team of reporters has an amazing blend in it. i have met many of these teams. then he pulls her prize-winning articles were reported by teams. one function was to interview the victim, and these were victims that had been many cases, had never talked about what had happened to them. tonight, i think our discussion
will turn to the question of the future of journalism. it will be a natural function of looking at these great stories and a great public service tradition around the globe and the los angeles times and other papers like them. frankly, that is a subject i do not think i considered at all. it had not occurred to me that newspapers would be entering a slippery slide in 2002. i have had to reinvent the book as i got closer to writing it, i needed to rewrite portions to get a sense of what was happening to journalism. i want to turn things now over to elizabeth for her thoughts on winning the pole surprise and --t is -- cold surprise prize.litzer
enough to i was lucky gold.about i think that we should do full disclosure and say that roy has a personal connection to this as well. book is a gold mine for those journalism junkies. it was really fun to read the stories about how the early way that things were done. can you mention your father? your father won? how many? my brother was involved in -- father was
involved in winning those. ofzabeth: it is a labor wonderful research into history. many of us who practice journalism do it at a breakneck pace. we are on a 24-7 schedule. a.m. after 2:00 senator kennedy died. we do not stop to think about the history of how we do it, we just do it. spoke to that roy that. i think that this goes back to the passion that is behind the motive for many of us to become journalists. i think, i probably thought that i would grow up to be jane
austen, instead i grew up to be lois lane. i have always had a formula, which i think has been very operative in the newsroom, of all persuasions. i would do stories assigned to me, to feed the engine. one, this was always about the underdog, digging up and assigning life -- shinging lights on in justice. that is the fuel for journalists, always looking for the other side. that is why it will not go away. to talk about the future of journalism, there is a future. maybe it is not a healthy future at this moment. it is alive, maybe not as well
as we would like it to be. andre in a state of flux things are changing. we are like those creatures emerging in the sea and we have not decided if we will have legs or wings, or all of them at once. and there is no way to have a crystal ball. it would be nice to have a prediction. believe that community journalism will not go away. printthink that probably journalism, it will be a long time before that goes away. it is too vital to communities. work likes not community dailies. people want to read about themselves. banner,n, there is a
the african-american publication, which has exploded in the city. it is important. and i think it is unprecedented. that is a word we are taught not , but iin journalism decided. do not tell my managers. i want to report good news. isill put my hat on, it weird, as a journalist you think of yourself as scribes, the working stiffs. i never buy white, because i think he -- because i get ink stains on everything. interest is high and this is a positive sign. no less of an authority than
robert o'neal, who is speaking at the cronkite school of journalism in arizona, described journalism degrees as the new liberal arts degrees. and what really keeps us going is curiosity. going, why? who says? we are teaching inquiry, allegiance to fact, very deep research skills, something that happens when he came gets going -- when a team gets going. we talk about priority of events. students,n tell my that i look to write students, i
tell them that this is uncreative writing. it is like that anyway. we teach a way to final -- funnel, a way to show truth, to defend it. the only thing to market is our own integrity. those are important qualities. but turning to investigative journalism. and to public service journalism, which remains the gold standard, to use a pun again. i also have been lucky enough to be part of a team in los angeles from the rodney king riots. we have all worked on them, we know how important they are. when you are doing the work, you are not thinking, i could get a pulitzer prize.
you are thinking, this is a hot story. it is very time-consuming, this type of reporting. that is one reason it is in jeopardy, and it is expensive. most reporters, the notion of the spotlight team is growing rarer in newsrooms. seeing ishat we are much like hybrids, which is exciting. actually, in journalism, 80's to work with-- i used to a photographer named joe rosenthal, who took the famous telegraph -- photograph of the flag over iwo jima. he was a very energetic guy and he used to come running in and
say, stop the presses. this just in. i pull this off the web -- pulle d this off the web today, a group from the san diego tribune -- they arenched forming an investigative journalism organization nonprofit. is the biggest funder san diego union. they will provide stories for various outlets in the community, focusing on that area. see a very aggressive group of reporters working at the virgin islands daily news, also winners of the pulitzer prize. here it is, this gorgeous paradise place, and they are
digging up ambitious projects, islandng how the government has created sham companies to award contracts. the public needs to know this information, must have this information. so more and more, i think that you are seeing hybridizations, where reporters and committed journalists, who may be are marginalized from their own newsrooms -- that happened a lot during my time, and are setting up their own outfits. there is a big group in new york who work tirelessly, a wonderful thing. and now we see a readership -- now we see a lot of partners with universities.
have the new england center for investigative journalism, which is representing, again a partnership of practicing journalism, student journalists with universities. it provides a win-win thing for everybody. the university of wisconsin, uc berkeley, they have a really on.llent program going universities,any except harvard i regret to say, so although it is true woodward and bernstein and watergate are not the only stories, they are probably sexiest.
was partobert redford of it. the kids learn these stories. and they want to become these journalists. my students look at all of the "alldent then -- look at the president's men," and they do not want to look like those guys. it is not about becoming those people, they want the hard work, it is not an easy job, but they want the glory. we are all glory hogs in this business. it is not a bad thing. you are a glory hog because you work so hard. the other element, the form of delivery will be changing and is changing now. because many newspapers and newspaper chains are outright
vanishing, which is tragic, we worry about the hometown paper in boston. i do not think it will go away. or, we are cutting back on staff. the tribune corporation, the parent corporation right now for the los angeles times, they have eliminated national correspondents except at the l.a. times. a complete change. the form of delivery will be changing and we will see much more investigative team work stories, such as we described with san diego and elsewhere, on the web. , you canl be websites google investigative journalism now and there are websites. but there is no way to monitor them, unless you have a
university, or pull a surprise -- pulitzer prize winning journalists. then again, is in a state of evolution. we will see more. and for that reason, i think that the committee itself will need to have a revolution of its own. right now, they are essentially print-centric. mr. harris: it is morphine. elizabeth: it is. soon they will have to recognize that there is good journalism that is web specific. i think that it will broaden. i know that there are websites i read daily for certain types of information, particularly investigative. it is all changing and i hope all of you will have papers delivered well into the next century. in the next life, wherever we
go. mr. harris: thank you, elizabeth. i think that your mention of what is going on in boston creates an issue for all of us wondering about the amazing reporting that happened in 2002 and whether that kind of reporting will continue. i hope that that kind of reporting will attack that one. sasha: that reminds me of a story. in our business, you go at a breakneck speed and it is hard to be board. -- bored. but you lose a lot of control of your personal life. i had a friend who decided that she cannot make weeknight plans ever, because she had to cancel them too often. the downside is, it is crazy between 9 a.m.-5:00 p.m.
wasstory images to roy, i covering different things for the globe, and when i joined the spotlighting team, they tell me, enjoy my retirement. you had the expectation when you went there. but it was the opposite in my case. we did a project about home construction and the typical program was a few days, you hope for change, then he write about it. then we begin to write about the iests, and then it was followed by other papers. case, it was not early retirement. it was exhausting. it was a real privilege to be able to do that kind of work. you work in a part of the globe that is hard to get into, and
that was by design from us about what we were working on could be done in private. not many people knew what was happening, that was a good thing. we basically want to get so far ahead on what we were working on that nobody else could catch up with us. in my case, the history of this project was, in early 2002 the globe got a new editor who is still there to this day. it was a case of franchise on an old-- fresh eyes on an story. there was somebody who is filing lawsuits alleging sexual abuse. mnist had had -- colu written about files that were sealed, saying that the interest of the church outweighed the public's interest in the
paperwork. most of the files were not available. globe new guy at the said, why does nobody question why these are sealed? they tried to overturn it. there were two parallel things happening. lawyers went to court and ultimately they were successful and the files were unsealed. then they came to the spotlight team and is that, try to figure out how much was known about this case. the church said it was a couple of bad apples, but we had a sense that many more priests knew what was happening. we began to do that and we found out that the problem was much more widespread than realized and it had gone on for decades. there was documentation that the church knew about. people had gone to the archdiocese. and then priests would be shipped elsewhere. 1970's, they and
shifted and he would probably not see them again. one parent has taken their child to a ski trip and she came across a priest that she had complained about, she got the church had handled it, but then she found out that he had really just been sent to massachusetts. we work on this story for a solid 1.5 years. and at the point where we decided to move on, we got a weird reaction. many readers were tied about reading about church stories. and many people felt like we should keep writing. we thought about handing it off and 39 new project. but it was a good thing to work on a team like that, because in the newsroom as liz mentioned, there is pressure to be prolific
. many people have asked if i have a quota for stories? i have not. when you feel like you are producing enough, you need to balance that with wanting to do lean all stories -- meaningfu stories. my old editor had an inspection about digging dry wells. or longer. have to go sometimes down the road for a while until you figure out it is worthwhile. you have to find a project four or five people's time. that is the big concern now, is newspapers are in a lot of trouble. how long can they continue to fund that kind of project where you put someone offer quite a while when you were trying to do more work with the smaller
staff? can they work? the globe still has that. very in-depth, detailed. we have a reporter that did a great story. globe"il now, "the committed to that. a great sign -- as liz mentioned, some innovative programs. a lot of them are nonprofits. there is a different kind of risk. if you are not self-sufficient then you're vulnerable to changes that could hurt the pockets of your philanthropist funder. i think all of us here hope as
newspapers try to figure out what they can become do not lose that. hopefully, we can do that really deep local stories. the one thing i really learned is you have to question of authority because it be don't, this is what happens. that is why you need these people to dig around and ask a lot of questions so bad things do not happen basically. en basically. >> one piece that brings us back to the book is an organization that comes into your community and will do a story that needs to be done, so often this kind of reporting is dependent on things bubbling up from the beat. this is one of the pieces that whenssing, is that
publications -- whether it is websites or newspapers -- i can bring in these expert reporters to find out about our problems, the history of the cases comes from the reporter. whether it is a religion reporter, a court reporter. against of watergate the bubble up from what is said in the courtroom. you should tell the philadelphia story. >> i will. i have a better story. i do want to touch on a couple of stories so you know where the book is. but, the case where the story comes from is the one thing we really have to worry about when mainstream media begins to decline. you cannot cover the beat with amateur reporters in the way we can do right now.
there is nothing wrong with amateurs. it is just we have all of these reporters who do know how to get a story, how to work on a team. have this blend of young 24/7 and that can work reporters that and spend time with the story.l commodityy necessary and one of the things we forget when we think, well, blogs can handle this. a group of experts. the reason elizabeth mentioned the philadelphia inquirer case -- it is just one case from the book that has a couple of things going for it. one is it is easy to tell because it is a fairly short story and some of the stories -- you get into how a team works. it gets very detailed.
i think it is fun to read about, but it is sometimes a little hard to relate, especially in a microphone. the other nice thing about the inquirer story is it is the kind of story that can be done by any reporter anywhere as long as that reporter has the support of the editor. just to say bring me this story. writes forthat the washington post -- he was covering medical business. on the business page of the philadelphia inquirer. one day, he was giving blood at the office. it was something he did and a lot of people did. while he was sitting there watching the blood fall out of his arm, he thought to himself, you know, i really don't know what happens to this blood when it leaves my arm. put it in a bag and somewhere it
becomes a commodity. something happens to wait and might make a good story to do. i'm a medical business reporter -- why shouldn't i look into this? he went to his donor who was a blood donor and come to think of it, i don't know either. he put down his notes about what you would do. go to a local red cross, set up an interview. he went to the guys office and sat down with them. i would like to do a story. i was giving blood and i figured out i didn't know anything about it. what happens to the blood after i give it? what kind of price you put on the leader of blood? the director said why are you asking this question? we don't have to tell you anything about this. >> a red flag. [laughter] wobble.ntenna began to
that was the beginning of his decision that he needed to spend some time with this. named jeanllow roberts who was a legend of the news cable business and was one of the truly great editors of all time. his editor told them go for it. you have the time to do this. that is an expense of the newspaper. that person who was supposed to be covering the medical business no longer can do those spot stories because he or she has to go up and now follow up on the story. that is the expense. newspapers first cut back on the most expensive thing they have. then they started cutting back on investigative and it will
come soon. >> one of the advantages of a team is that it can be risky to have the beat reporter do a very controversial story because you could end up torching a lot of bridges in the process. when we get our story, there was discussion about what you bring in because he will need to maintain longer-term relationships that the spotlight team could bear down harder. what you lose when you don't have that team, not having to worry about the long-term. >> that was part of the fun of the book. when i discovered nobody came to the reporters and how it evolved, i got to all the reporters and for me as a 40 year reporter, i was fascinated to find out what michael paulson felt about not being the point beginning. the it was not great that all of
this reporting was going around him. he hadtime it was over, written more of the stories and his name was more on the stories that probably anyone but it took a while. >> they can get very upset because they are going on their turf. it is sometimes very awkward. for instance, we don't necessarily know about it. we have maybe used the wrong nomenclature. maybe didn'tn, me have the right terminology. one reporter trying to face the team -- having to learn all of that terminology was quite something. you needed a glossary. reporters know a lot of readers do not know and that is
each of these great stories starts with some little term, little cute curiosity and basic question. this amazing -- i have learned to stop using the word incredible. i think people take that literally sometimes. there is an amazing process of looking at where a story starts from giving blood in the office, almost all of the stories i write go back and look at what i moment that momen this story could be a story of a lifetime and that is what i think we need to keep in courage and and that is what the students want to learn. that is why i was so amazed to find so few of these stories
behind the stories seven told. it is important -- we talk about the finances and the cutbacks in the budgets and a number of reporters. that is also the consolidation of newspapers and news organizations. sometimes they fall into the hand of his those owners. sometimes the owner of the tribune incorporation who is trying to unload it basically said pulitzer -- i will not use the vulgar language -- who gives a blank about pulitzer? that was after it was quoted. why do we care about prizes? -- we don't get much affirmation. we don't make a lot of money -- maybe we do come up for the rest
of us do not. we are doing this because we love it. it is just a delirious moment for everyone. you feel that your entire organization has been recognized. the champagne flows, people are crazy. about us versus them, it is about something good happening. >> i would like to open the floor for some others. elizabeth was talking about the promising things. young people are still studying journalism and trying to learn how they can serve in journalism whether it is online or print. the other thing that occurs is
what is called the news literacy. i think for all of those young people who really don't know the difference between a blog post or something that pops up on a telephone from a friend at a fully reported story, there is to tellement going on readers how to evaluate the material they get. not the news, because it might not be news. it gives them tools, the kind of tools most of us in this atience, most of us learned any of our father and mother, how to read sensibly. a lot of kids really don't have that. media is media. if it is flashing, it is true. [laughter] i warned you.
movement isers in applying the same discipline as we in journalism schools. it is a very positive thing. you are hearing a lot of positive things. you thought this would be people beating each other up but you can do that because you are the audience. are there any questions? people always ask me what my favorite story is and it is like judging children. i don't do that but we have talked about a couple of them. any burning question? they follow instructions here. thank you for a very hopeful discussion. >> i was exciting to hear about the back story of how prizes were awarded and if there were some drama? is that in the book or the next
book? >> it is in the book. it was not something that was driving me. i wanted to tell the story about reporting but i found myself getting deeper and deeper into the political process. pulitzer process. really come new a new what a , no one knew what a pulitzer prize was. it was just remarkable you can find a story that other editors would say you did a great job with. eventually, it became institutionalized. newspapers and will about prizes knew about prizes and
wanted to win then. m. -- had a small group of guys that is really the people running journalism in the 1940's and 1950's. it was not until after world war ii that you had women in the newsroom. you had a small group of people making those calls. i believe they were dedicated taking what they consider to be the best stories of the year and they would fight each other often and say if they saw that, for example, the system was being gamed, one of the rules is no publication should win two prizes and a year that used that against each other. andbradley was on the board was sure he would have to fight to get watergate. a lot of newspapers without following watergate.
without the washington post was way off. it was not until people started confessing that it was clear. in the late 1970's, there was a reform movement and my judgment there was some very strong the movementreform to make sure it was a diverse group that came from small papers and large papers. the juries were also diversified and what has come out is a pure .ommittee when it comes to the best stories of the year, they are .evoted
>> to what extent does the pulitzer go into the process at all? \>> i think it is pure merit. the board takes the jury recommendation and they sit down. there are 14 prizes, one of which is the journalism prize. storiesked at the 14 that the juries have picked and they will throw out ones they overrule. awould not call that political decision, i would call that a pure decision of when we , we want body of work
to make sure the 14 stories that are the top expression of american journalism are the ones that are selected. i think that element is gone. you have a situation where they don't worry about it publication fiveng for a crng four or prizes. the new york times won seven during 9/11. year, 2008, the washington post won five. you are probably seeing that more and more. prizes will probably awarded. >> sometimes, it is true there are cases where editors sit down and plop the story of hope.
the new york times has the resources and the skills and it works. >> part of what i love about the book is there is a different array of winners. the new york times covered after september 11 which was an incredible read. very thorough. it was trendsetting. >> it transformed we as journalists crafted our craft. exactly, the lives were remembered. it was a very important moment and ratgreat win. on the other side, you have these solo efforts. advantage but big it can also be burdened. we always love the underdogs as journalists.
collects there were some >> there were someew yor underdogs of the new york times. they had put together portraits of grief. what i found is we had an accidental pulitzer. these were middle level editors just like all of us pressed on a bring met are told a treatment of how we handle the victims. on the second day after 9/11. well, if you remember, we didn't know who was dead. we didn't know who was missing. we knew, but we didn't know anything. whether it was a couple of thousand, 20,000. the newspaper, the greatest newspaper in the
country to figure out how to cover this. christine k. was saying how to cover this. evolving of grief was because they couldn't call the of th obituaries. all they knew was people were missing. i found where this came from, and was the flyer that she began to collect. last seen filming up, it was pamphlets that she began to develop a 200 word profile, extremely controversial. they were extremely controversial including among the family who would say why
didn't you say my son was the head of rotary? the article was about how he was a great soccer coach for his kid. away atticles hammered one little element of someone's life. just amazing stories that came out of you assume the new york times. it was not that way at all. they didn't know where these names would come from. needbubbled up from the and some of the things were opposed by the top editors but they did not know what to do about it. amazing story. yes, ma'am? can you come to the microphone? >> hi.
you mentioned the foreign reporters are the first ones to have been gotten rid of. del?ou see a new mo >> there is a wonderful model coming out of boston. are you familiar with the global post? is an exciting adventure in journalism. it is the brainchild of the -- globe? a manager of the >> i'm not sure. >> he is a wonderful reporter. a reporters reporter. a great writer. the founder of knowing when ws which is the oldest one in the country.
when he started it, they said are you nuts? of course, it became the model for everything else. it is a website dedicated to news. foreign they have correspondents based in all the countries that are journalists. it is really exciting. it is so exciting. it is a really exciting moment. the cost sending correspondence to a country because they are already there. it eliminates the response of nature.
place, a coupakes takes place -- well, you can send somebody there and i know the context. then don't have to get -- we as journalists parachute into this thing and we are experts on paraguay which means we have to cram our brains. these are people that are in the community and understand. >> they now had to do foreign reporting. >> even in a place you don't speak the language. a lot of obstacles to getting the story. >> it is still an island of sanity and global madhouse because we have been cutting back so much when the tribute had staffed all of the world, the l.a. times hats that all of the world.
>> five or six or seven. >> anyway, it did not used to be that way. we need to balance that out. my former employer, the economist, is in hog heaven because nobody is delivering for news and the economist is growing because it can deliver what no one else can. we are getting a lot of our news from the associated press. that is coming through the few reporters. >> a really important point because we are becoming more insulated. we don't know about what we get a lot of. like, oh my, one of my editors green man arrivingarrivin from mars. knowledge.
it is very dangerous because we don't get enough from the rest of the world. >> there is also a price or a lasts because the people reporting. >> you cannot cover news very accurately or you will die. yes, it is a very good question. however, you have oversight from editors. that may be the moment you send people over to -- charlie did a in from thegigo outsiders perspective.
>> one more question. i guess we're running over one hour. >> like paulsen's story, i got a call from springfield, massachusetts. globe -- me the boston mike paulsen wrote an article about one the great survivors. it was about the fold. in boston, -- editionsobe had two out. michael paulson story would have page.n fo front >> of follow the sexual abuse
i follow the sexual abuse story. -- i thinkingfield there was a resource differential how the local newspapers in springfield at worcester were not able to compete with the globe in terms of coverage. likeof these stories went regional. , you weree news site able to get a flavor of it. it seemed like these reporters that were competing against resources of great -- howcations systems
does that impact -- my question , a major story like that, how does that impact local stories that are just as significant as other areas? t can be replicated. what i think made the story so strong is the paper came out of the file cabinets. it was impossible for people to have a reaction because we were showing you what was in the files. that took some money. that would be hard to replicate. >> became from springfield and yet the springville newspapers had a real challenge locally to get that information out. >> the way you tell it locally, looking at specific cases, in new hampshire, very good
reporting. >> there were some public court cases that could have been done. >> one of the wonderful things about the globe, extraordinary, you know, effort, was it prompted investigations all over the country. it scared the pants off the jury. you see -- [laughter] that was a bad analogy. people would say what is it? those people missed the point which is probably happening. one -- >> that is why we need editors. >> one way all of you can encourage investigative journalism is it is worth calling the newspaper. newspapers take phone calls. if you see something reported,
call. >> i totally agree. you learn to weed out the cranks. they are on every square inch and have specific handwriting. phone, we are always receptive. it does not mean you will do the story but you will hear their story. >> what i would like to say is that i said the pull of is noter prizes a political organization. they are getting a lot of attention of people that are doing great work against long odds. the winner of last year was the las vegas fund which is a
newspaper handed out in the middle of a review journal in las vegas. it is a troubled paper. who winner was a reporter actually was working on her first assignment, who came over, was given this as a probation task to do this story and it was about -- they detected there was a lot of people dying in construction sites on the script. thistrip. she began to explore this as a young reporter and they gave her a lot of time to work on it. she came back with a phenomenal story. she built this story into a story that was a terrific pulitzer prize winner. prize, ashe pulitzer
i'm looking out these stories, they know a lot of stories are not going to be the boston globe kind of stories or the washington post with walter reed. these are going to be rarer beasts and the stories that are going to get more attention are probably going to be like alexander and her discovery of what is going on in las vegas. tips, if you know something going on, you still will have the reporter at your msm. who willstream media be able to do the job in many cases and welcome your collaboration. thank you very much for your interest tonight. we do have a discount on the book if you're interested.
you can go back to these aha moments and find out about journalism, i would be happy. i'm free. >> they are really great stories. it is not dry reading. >> it is really a great read. [applause] >> on history bookshelf coming here from the country's best history writers every saturday at rpm and you can hear any of our programs when you visit our website. are watching american history tv all weekend, every weekend on c-span3. >> american history tv this weekend.
tonight at 8:00 eastern, mary goldwater shares americans divisions at arizona state university. >> i was aware of devices. >> when were those devices placed? 1970. summer of collects it was put into the oval office. sunday morning at 10:00 eastern, -- we all own an equal part. >> we have not been very good
stewards of this great country. you are setting the example to rebuild a government. god bless you for that. >> the 1992 campaign of ross perot. 6:00 --vening at >> it is interesting because he does not just influence them. they are seeing it in newspapers today. wordtionalism is the one that is linked to the pulitzer. sensationalism to right wrongs. gallery.litzer prize theover facts about pulitzer prize-winning photographs and the stories behind the images. at 6:30 p.m., the 100
anniversary of the pulitzer prize. it commemorates winners. the keynote speaker is john lewis. >> it shapes tehe house. we must not give up. you must not give up. you must hold on. >> for the complete american history tv we can schedule, go to c-span.org. this week on lectures in history, i was state university professor carlton basmajian talks about the northwest ordinance which was an act of congress to organize and govern the new acquired territory from
the ohio river from mississippi. he describes the 18th century effort which divided the territory into a grid pattern and proposed a transportation at roads and the canal. he argues this was applied at -- wasands a purchase applied at the louisiana purchase. behindere two minutes but not too far so. wwhat i will do today is kind of catch up or start were were stopped ande talk about the idea of national planning. it relates to the fishman reading. i hope some of you have looked at it. a specific aen