Aaron Parsley of Texas Monthly
For his extraordinary personal account of survival and loss written days after the historic Central Texas floods that tore the writer’s house out from under him and his family, taking the life of his nephew.
Love Texas Monthly, this was a tough read after that awful flood incident:
> Staff of Pablo Torre Finds Out
> For a pioneering and entertaining form of live podcast journalism that investigated how the Los Angeles Clippers seemingly evaded the NBA’s salary cap rules by funneling money to a star player through an environmental startup.
This is still being investigated by the NBA. I'm curious how it'll play out, but it's not a good look for the league.
I’ve been gradually reading prior Pulitzer winners for fiction and I have to say I haven’t hit a bad one yet. Maybe I’ll try and read this years before it’s several decades old.
every once in awhile I'm reading a Pulitzer winner (esp. fiction) and at the beginning I'm thinking "how did this win that year?" and then by the end of the book I think "wow, I've never read anything like this before"
Once again, a moment of gratitude for the San Francisco Chronicle. In a time when local news is mostly gutted, I'm grateful to live in the rare mid-size city that has a robust local paper. Real investigative reporting, a serious local political beat, and features that win Pulitzer prizes. Plus a great sports section and restaurant critics!
I completely agree, but… mid sized city? The Chronicle centers around SF but I think of it more like a Bay Area paper. It’s market’s a lot bigger than mid sized city.
Journalists were eating well this year with Trump's never-ending scandals. WAPO's entire nominated work is about Epstein Files, some other winners had his money-making scheme off crypto and stock manipulation.
True, but there are a heck of a lot of issues they are not touching as well. The whole age verification/digital ID thing does not feature although tech surveillance does (and I think these tie in).
Pablo Torre and Julie K. Brown are the only truly deserving winners here. Anyone willing to break down and discuss the Epstein case is a real journalist and both of them have done exactly that. The Times and other major outlets were reticent to cover it, and have since routinely run puff pieces. Riley Walz and the folks at Jmail deserve a lot of credit as well.
Some evidence as to why Brown did not originally win the Pulitzer, instead this citation a few years too late:
>Brown’s “Perversion of Justice” series won a prestigious George Polk award. The Herald entered the Epstein series for a Pulitzer Prize that year, but it was not a finalist. Alan Dershowitz, the attorney and television personality who helped broker Epstein’s original deal, wrote a letter to the Pulitzer committee that year, urging them not to honor Brown’s work.
Will say if you haven't checked pablo's clippers saga both hilarious in the way it was covered and that Balmer and Co thought that they could get away with this! Hamburger!!
The conclusion that "insurance companies using algorithmic tools have failed Californians who lost their homes to fire by systematically undervaluing their properties" seems pretty dubious to me. Everyone is shooting the messenger by getting angry at the insurance companies when fire insurance isn't cheaper. Meanwhile many insurance companies are leaving California entirely.
It isn't the "evil algorithms" at fault here - it's the high risk of fire.
The reporting isn't about cost or availability of insurance; it is more about how insurance companies signficantly reduce payouts through a combination of secrecy, coercive practices against adjusters, paying less than standard rates, and not paying for portions of repairs that homeowners should reasonably expect to be covered. It also reported on areas beyond California.
Aaron Parsley of Texas Monthly For his extraordinary personal account of survival and loss written days after the historic Central Texas floods that tore the writer’s house out from under him and his family, taking the life of his nephew.
Love Texas Monthly, this was a tough read after that awful flood incident:
https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-politics/texas-flood-first...
Discussion on HN https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44576352
> Staff of Pablo Torre Finds Out > For a pioneering and entertaining form of live podcast journalism that investigated how the Los Angeles Clippers seemingly evaded the NBA’s salary cap rules by funneling money to a star player through an environmental startup.
This is still being investigated by the NBA. I'm curious how it'll play out, but it's not a good look for the league.
I’ve been gradually reading prior Pulitzer winners for fiction and I have to say I haven’t hit a bad one yet. Maybe I’ll try and read this years before it’s several decades old.
every once in awhile I'm reading a Pulitzer winner (esp. fiction) and at the beginning I'm thinking "how did this win that year?" and then by the end of the book I think "wow, I've never read anything like this before"
I did the same a while ago and completely agree! They're always so good even if it's not necessarily my cup of tea
Once again, a moment of gratitude for the San Francisco Chronicle. In a time when local news is mostly gutted, I'm grateful to live in the rare mid-size city that has a robust local paper. Real investigative reporting, a serious local political beat, and features that win Pulitzer prizes. Plus a great sports section and restaurant critics!
I completely agree, but… mid sized city? The Chronicle centers around SF but I think of it more like a Bay Area paper. It’s market’s a lot bigger than mid sized city.
Journalists were eating well this year with Trump's never-ending scandals. WAPO's entire nominated work is about Epstein Files, some other winners had his money-making scheme off crypto and stock manipulation.
True, but there are a heck of a lot of issues they are not touching as well. The whole age verification/digital ID thing does not feature although tech surveillance does (and I think these tie in).
Pablo Torre and Julie K. Brown are the only truly deserving winners here. Anyone willing to break down and discuss the Epstein case is a real journalist and both of them have done exactly that. The Times and other major outlets were reticent to cover it, and have since routinely run puff pieces. Riley Walz and the folks at Jmail deserve a lot of credit as well.
Some evidence as to why Brown did not originally win the Pulitzer, instead this citation a few years too late:
>Brown’s “Perversion of Justice” series won a prestigious George Polk award. The Herald entered the Epstein series for a Pulitzer Prize that year, but it was not a finalist. Alan Dershowitz, the attorney and television personality who helped broker Epstein’s original deal, wrote a letter to the Pulitzer committee that year, urging them not to honor Brown’s work.
https://www.inquirer.com/news/pennsylvania/julie-brown-pulit...
The rot runs deep
Aaron Parsley's account of the Kerrville flood in Texas Monthly is deserving. A waterline-level personal account that makes a disaster real. https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-politics/texas-flood-first...
Will say if you haven't checked pablo's clippers saga both hilarious in the way it was covered and that Balmer and Co thought that they could get away with this! Hamburger!!
There is a significant chance they do get away with it.
But thanks to the visibility Torre has given it, it'll be a lot harder for the NBA to go light on them.
WaPo gets top billing as winners in the "Public Service" category.
"How Jeff Bezos Upended The Washington Post"
https://archive.ph/Je6AH
Fascinating.
The conclusion that "insurance companies using algorithmic tools have failed Californians who lost their homes to fire by systematically undervaluing their properties" seems pretty dubious to me. Everyone is shooting the messenger by getting angry at the insurance companies when fire insurance isn't cheaper. Meanwhile many insurance companies are leaving California entirely.
It isn't the "evil algorithms" at fault here - it's the high risk of fire.
The reporting isn't about cost or availability of insurance; it is more about how insurance companies signficantly reduce payouts through a combination of secrecy, coercive practices against adjusters, paying less than standard rates, and not paying for portions of repairs that homeowners should reasonably expect to be covered. It also reported on areas beyond California.