NY'ers: 'Flag Raising at Ground Zero' Should Have Won Pulitzer

NEWSMAX ^ | 4/11/02 | Limbacher

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

By a margin of two-to-one, New York Post readers say the Pulitzer Prize committee missed the boat on Tuesday when it gave its photojournalism award to the New York Times for a series of photos of the Twin Towers' collapse - while snubbing the now-legendary photo, "Flag Raising at Ground Zero."

66 percent of Post readers preferred the photo of firefighters Dan McWilliams, Bill Eisengrein and George Johnson hoisting Old Glory atop a makeshift flag pole they retrieved from the Twin Towers' wreckage just hours after the 9/11 attacks.

33 percent favored the Times series, in the self-selecting online poll.

The Pulitzer committee's decision left critics wondering if the controversy surrounding a 9/11 tribute based on the photo played a role in the choice.

In January, a firestorm of protest erupted after NewsMax.com revealed department-wide discontent over plans for a statue that altered the races of two of the three firemen. (See: Racial Changes Made in Ground Zero Firefighter Tribute)

After a week of nationwide outrage, the FDNY relented, announcing it would search for an alternative memorial.

The famed flag, now a historic icon that many compare the flag raised at Iwo Jima, was last flown two weeks ago in a ceremony aboard the U.S.S. Theodore Roosevelt after it returned to the U.S. after months at sea in the Persian Gulf.

Firefighter McWilliams was invited to the Roosevelt commemoration but couldn't accept because he was busy attending the funeral of a fellow New York City firefighter.

In March, McWilliams, Eisengrein and Johnson were invited to the White House after President Bush personally selected "Flag Raising" for a special-issue commemorative postage stamp.

[Atlas Sneezed]

Click Here for the NYT's Pulitzer-winning photos.

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

The NY Times won the majority of the awards, why do you think that was?

[gunnyg]

FREEDOM IS NOT FREE!

[TomGuy]

Well, it's the photographer's fault. Had he staged a "diversity" photo-op, he would have won; but how can a photo with 3 caucasian guys even be considered. Now, had they been able to build that "diversity" statue (no thanks to Jeff Head's petition -- you undiversity, you!) and he photo-ed it, he might have won.

Get with the program! Diversity Diversity Diversity!

When Michael Belleseiles writes about this in a future book, we will know the truth--that that flag was raised by a diverse group of mixed-sex/mixed-culture/mixed-race/mixed-up liberals.

(end sarcasm)

In truth, it is regretful that the photo did not receive a Pulitzer; however, that photo will live in history and will always honor the day, September 11, 2001.

[beerhead]

I'm a photographer and may be able to shed some light (get it) on this. One big strike the photo had against it was that it so closely resembled the flag raising at Iwo Jima photo. Photographic judges are acutely averse to anything that even resembles something that's been done before.

[doberville]

This tells you all you need to know about the worth of the Pulitzers. They are a sham - along with the Red Cross, United Way, the AKC and the Nobel Peace Prizes, to name but a few. Pity.

[OldFriend]

I guess there was a warning after last year when the picture of Elian with the INS agent's gun in his face won a Pulitzer. What a shame, but the Pulitzer, like the Nobel is totally corrupted by the p.c. crowd.

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

You avoided my question. Why did all of the awards go to the big Rat publications?

[gunnyg]

Yeah, beerhead--methinks ye be correct--here's another pic that never got its due, notwithstanding it's THE GENUINE ARTICLE!

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

When has it ever been done before here?

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

"Nobel is totally corrupted by the p.c. crowd."

Finally.

[Rubber Ducky]

You are correct, sir. It will be like the Gettysburg address. At the time, Lincoln's brief remarks were considered only a postcript to the flowery and verbose speech of the gentleman who preceded him--- a name which is largely forgotten now. For two points, can anyone name this politician?

[gunnyg]

[Procyon]

Say, isn't this the Pulitzer Prize winning photo? We can all say that every time we see it. After a while, the Pulitzer clowns will grow tired of correcting us, saying, "No, the most memorable photo of 2001 was not the winner. We chose a shot of some poor woman being stripped by a Mardi Gras crowd. Much more newsworthy." And every time they publish a retrospect, they'll be shamed. Of course, they are probably pretty shameless to begin with.

[Procyon]

I now realize why that photo couldn't win. It could never be included in future high school history books without retouching it to show the Hispanic homeless fireperson-of-gender and the paraplegic black fireperson with two daddies who, history will record, were there along with the lone white male person.

[OldFriend]

Sorry Mr. Photographer, Sir....but that excuse just doesn't fly!