Good (early!) morning from L.A. Here's the latest from The Washington Post, Media Matters, Pablo Torre, Paramount, Bret Baier, Instagram, and more... |
The Post gets a Pulitzer — and a court win |
Tom Brenner/The Washington Post/Getty Images |
In a matter of hours on Monday, The Washington Post received the 2026 Pulitzer Prize for public service — thanks in part to reporter Hannah Natanson's work — and won a critical victory in its fight against the FBI's seizure of Natanson's devices.
It was, a longtime staffer told me, the best day at the Post in quite some time.
"Another message of today is: The Washington Post is not going anywhere," executive editor Matt Murray told an emotional newsroom during his congratulatory speech.
The Post's financial woes and self-inflicted wounds have been chronicled at length, including here. Murray acknowledged the outside scrutiny of the Post's "difficult stretch" in his remarks. "But today should be a reminder of all that is here and of why we are doing that work, why the Post needs to be a thriving institution," he said.
The Post edged out two finalists, the Chicago Tribune and the Wall Street Journal, for the public service prize, which is presented to the entire newsroom but was specifically for stories about President Trump's overhaul of the federal workforce.
Natanson "chronicled how federal workers' lives were upended" with the help of more than 1,000 sources — and those contacts may have been put at risk when the FBI raided her home and seized her devices in January. The government justified the extraordinary raid by citing a leak investigation.
While the Post editors and reporters were celebrating the Pulitzer, they learned of a favorable court ruling: "The Justice Department will remain blocked" from examining Natanson's devices, "a federal judge in Virginia ruled Monday," the Post's Perry Stein and Aaron Schaffer wrote.
This is the second time the court has "rejected" the DOJ's efforts to sift through the phone and computers, they added.
|
In his speech, Murray spoke passionately about the Natanson case. "With her devices in the government's hands, Hannah's reporting has been hampered," he said. "Her sources are uneasy. A chilling effect has occurred — caused directly by an unprecedented action that is among the most aggressive moves against a journalist that we have ever seen in this country."
"This matters deeply and personally to Hannah," Murray said. "She lost not just reporting materials but personal ones — including, as many of you know, her wedding plans. The violation is real, the burden is real, and The Washington Post stands with Hannah completely and without reservation."
"But this case is about more than Hannah," he continued. "If the government prevails, we will have crossed a threshold. A precedent will have been set that allows the government to raid a journalist's private home, seize her materials, and determine for itself — without independent review, without constraint — what it gets to keep and examine. That is a profound threat. Not just to the Post. Not just to Hannah. To every journalist, every source, every person in this country."
Murray expressed gratitude to Natanson, and to her lawyers and the Post lawyers who were in the room, and said, "If the Pulitzer Board's recognition today helps bring broader awareness to what is at stake — if it casts the importance of this battle into clearer light for the public, for our peers, for policymakers — then I know we are grateful for that too."
Natanson also addressed the newsroom, and she said, "To every government worker who risked so much to confide in me, I want you to know your trust is the highest honor I will ever receive. We at The Post are doing everything we can to protect it. And I want to thank you. You believe that truth matters in a democracy. You trusted that The Washington Post was the right place to report it. With everything I have, I still believe that, too."
>> Full disclosure: I was on the nominating jury for the public service prize. The deliberation process was confidential.
|
What broke through this year |
"The Pulitzer Prize winners are more than a collection of standout stories," Poynter observed. "They're an annual signal about what journalism values and what kind of work can break through."
A number of the winners "reflected the fallout from the first year of Donald Trump‘s second term, with the Pulitzer committee recognizing stories and coverage of the administration’s conflicts of interest, the president’s campaigns of retribution, ICE raids and cutbacks to the federal workforce," Deadline's Ted Johnson wrote.
>> You can spend some time with all the winning work here.
>> Julie K. Brown of the Miami Herald received a (long overdue) special citation for her work uncovering Jeffrey Epstein's crimes.
>> "Pablo Torre Finds Out" received the audio reporting prize for "a pioneering and entertaining form of live podcast journalism."
>> The Post's other Pulitzer win on Monday was for feature photography. Scott Nover recapped the newsroom celebration here.
|
Media Matters says it has defeated the FTC |
Media Matters for America says it has scored a "total victory" against the Trump admin. Yesterday, Law360's Bryan Koenig reports, Media Matters announced a settlement "resolving its retaliation claims against the Federal Trade Commission, securing a promise by the agency 'to forgo ever reissuing or issuing a substantially similar' administrative subpoena to the left-leaning watchdog in the search for censorship of conservatives."
|
Visa revocations raise eyebrows at Costa Rica's top paper |
The US "has revoked the visas of several board executives at La Nación, one of Costa Rica's leading media outlets, triggering fresh accusations that the U.S. — in conjunction with the allied Costa Rican government — is stripping visas to punish critics and political opponents," Javier Córdoba reports for The AP.
The paper "has long been a thorn in the side of outgoing Costa Rican President Rodrigo Chaves," who is leaving office on Friday. Read on...
|
CNN's big California debate |
CNN anchors Kaitlan Collins and Elex Michaelson will be back in debate prep this morning for tonight's California gubernatorial primary debate. The face-off begins at 6 p.m. PT/9 p.m. ET on CNN.
"Ballots have already gone out," the primary day is on June 2, "and we have no idea who the next governor of California will be," Michaelson told me at CNN's Burbank studio last night. "There are realistic scenarios where five or six different people could win, which is what makes this debate so high stakes..."
|
|
|
|
