If there’s a headline and a link on the front page of the Seattle Times website, it must be news…
The Seattle Times won four first-place honors, and the Tri-City Herald won three, in the 2010 C.B. Blethen Memorial Awards for distinguished reporting.
The annual awards were established in 1977 in honor of Blethen, publisher of The Times from 1915 to 1941.
So, um, the Blethen-owned Times reports that the Blethen-owned Times wins four Blethen Awards. Such an honor.
Funny – SP has almost the exact same blog post… the Times irritates both sites (and sides), each seems.
Not only does your article quote the Times out of context for a cheap joke — the very next sentence after your quote says the Times has nothing to do with who gets the awards — it also duplicates a post on SoundPoliics. Standards fail.
Bruce @2,
If there is ever an ethical justification for quoting something out of context, it is, in fact, in the service of a cheap joke.
Goldy@2, and if there is ever an ethical justification for quoting someone out of context in the service of anything, it involves a quote from the Seattle Times.
I’d like to be the first to congratulate Goldy on winning the award he awarded himself.
I won the Michael’s awesome so he gets to sleep in award this morning.
Lame when Sharkansky did it.
Lamer when done here.
Lame awards are lame awards. Who cares?
BoyScout @7,
Stefan still has a blog? Who knew?
And HA doesn’t give any awards to the Tri-City Herald? If you gave yourself 9 and them 1 or maybe 2….it would make the HA award seem much more prestigious and add credibility!
That and it would probably give the TCH another framed award for their lobby as well send some Tri-Citians into a tizzy affirming it’s always been the liberal Democrats lapdog.
It’s what Colbert would do….
The Seattle Times’ competitors for the award? The Tacoma Herald-Tribune? The Everett Herald, The Tri-City Herald? Other papers from Yakima, Vancouver, Bremerton? How about the Seattle Weekly?
I saw the article, and after reading the first paragraph, it seems clear to me that it doesn’t really matter how “neutral” the judges are. With the departure of the P.I. from consideration (since they were no longer in print format), the Times is by far the largest paper in the contest area in terms of demographic area covered, circulation, budget, etc. If they didn’t come away with a majority of the awards, it would be quite an embarrasment.
By the way, it’s the Seattle Times and the Spokane Spokesman-Review commissioned a poll of Washington residents, the results of which were published in Sunday’s edition. The results showed a majority of Washington residents blamed the Republican party for the economic collapse over the Democrates (39% blamed Republicans, 27% Democrats, and about 25% blamed both parties). They also said they would trust the Democratic Party more than the Republican Party to lead the way out of the rescession (43% Democrates vs. 35% Republicans), in clear contrast to Republican and Tea Party claims.
So how does the Seattle Times treat the story? Their headline says: “State voters deeply split over whom to trust”, along with a lot of discussion in the text about how divided the state was.
The P.I. headline:
“Poll: Washingtonians blame GOP for bad economy”
@5 Okay, since you beat me to it, I’ll second.
2, 4 — Aren’t a little thin-skinned, are you, Bruce?
You forgot to mention the awards were handed out by Mike Shepard, senior vice president of Business Operations at The Seattle Times. But he’s not partial – nor is Jill Mackie of the Times, who is on the board of the group administering the awards, the Pacific Northwest Newspaper Assn. (which is headquartered in…Sacramento?)
http://www.pnna.com/about_bod.cfm
Well along with the demise of newspapers, the Pulitzer seems out of reach for the Seattle Times. So it is good that an allegedly disinterested party, who would name an award after just one newspaperman in the region, would provide an annual fodder for the Times to reap.
I smell a tax dodge.