The press often forgets their primary duty is informative, not competitive.

The New York Times furthered this amnesia today with three tweets about bombings at the Boston Marathon and four new, shiny Pulitzers.

This is quite sad, especially when much of journalism has real trouble getting their facts straight.

The competitive nature of reporting needs to stop. It doesn’t start with The New York Times, and it goes far beyond a slightly imbalanced “tweet” ratio.

Journalism, like any industry, falls prey to the human desire for trophies and accolades. But unlike other industries, journalism cannot be quantifiably judged as other things can be. 

Kobe can get MVP (I mean, not any more, let’s be real) for racking up more triple-doubles than anyone else in the league, but how does one rank publications meaningfully, when each one of them will at times misreport, be slightly slower than others, or run op-eds comparing any given thing to Nazi-Germany?

Information is anything but a new currency, and those producing it should stop sacrificing their “art” (ideally) for nearly meaningless awards.

Knowledge will begin to stop being its own reward when Pulitzers matter more than bombings.

I am well aware of the competitive spirit, and even used to take rankings given to me based on speaking seriously, so this problem is not unfamiliar to me.

I understand the allure of rankings, trophies, and praise.

That kind of numerical praise feels good when you ignore the immense importance behind what it is you are being graded for.

The meaning is the process, to simplify. The speech matters, not the rank.

The article matters, not the award given to your publication, professional or otherwise.