SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " pulitzer " 40 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Sign in to save shuffle history.
Iowa City Book Festival: Pulitzer winners, poets and more
Iowa City's 18th annual Book Festival runs Oct. 18-25, showcasing Pulitzer winners Yiyun Li, Marilynne Robinson and Nicholas Kristof. Most events are free, including a Robinson-Kristof public conversation.
Black men's mental health explored in Pulitzer-winning Detroit Rep play
Through the power of friendship, we are able to see the power in ourselves. This is the message of playwright Eboni Booth’s lovely “Primary Trust.”
ENTERTAINMENT: Jazz at the Joint, TheatreSquared seasons scheduled
TheatreSquared opens its 2026-27 Main Stage season Sept. 9-27 with the Pulitzer Prize and Tony Award-winning play "Fences" by August Wilson.
Pulitzer winner 'Fairview' is a little cloudy in its L.A. premiere
Jackie Sibblies Drury's Pulitzer Prize-winning drama "Fairview" receives its L.A. premiere at the Matrix in a Rogue Machine production directed by Oz Scott.
AP, Washington Post, Reuters and Minnesota Star Tribune among Pulitzer winners for 2025 work
The Washington Post won the Pulitzer Prize for public service for scrutinizing the Trump administration’s sweeping, choppy cuts and changes to federal agencies. The Associated Press won the 2026 Pulitzer
Author Dava Sobel on her new book ‘The Elements of Marie Curie: How the Glow of Radium Lit a Path for Women in Science’
Marie Curie is the most famous woman in the history of science. She coined the term “radioactivity” and traveled the world to share its secrets. Her story is told in a new book by acclaimed Pulitzer Prize finalist Dava Sobel, but, along the way, she tells the stories of other women who trained in Curie’s lab who would pursue their own scientific careers.
How a health clinic in South Africa is navigating Trump's cuts to HIV funding
Community health programs in South Africa have been heavily impacted by U.S. cuts to global aid. Which means there are fewer community and health workers to support low-income people with HIV and AIDS.We recently visited one of those programs, called We Care, to learn more about the experiences of the few employees who still remain.For sponsor-free episodes of Consider This, sign up for Consider This+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org. Email us at considerthis@npr.org.This story was supported by the Pulitzer Center.This episode was produced by Matt Ozug, Karen Zamora and Elena Burnett, with audio engineering by Peter Ellena.It was edited by Patrick Jarenwattananon and William Troop.Our executive producer is Sami Yenigun.
The science behind small wins
So you want to change a habit — or maybe start something new. Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and author Charles Duhigg’s book, “The Power of Habit,” explores how habits are made, and the cues and rewards that shape our behavior. He spoke with Amna Nawaz about how to make habits that actually stick as well as his most recent book, “Supercommunicators.”
In Retrospect: Poland, Russia, Europe
In April I spent a few days with Zryw, a Polish non-profit organization that recruits young people to enter politics and public life. Their aim is to build a new generation of civic leaders in Poland. I’ve followed their evolution from the beginning; my son is one of the founders. (“Zryw” means “impulse” or “burst of speed” in Polish). Julie Chmielewska, one of Zryw’s leaders, interviewed me at the event. Here is the conversation, lightly edited for grammar and context: Julia Chmielewska: Assuming that culture shapes institutions, could we conclude that some cultures are more prone to authoritarianism? Anne Applebaum: I don’t think so. Every culture, every nation, and every country has the potential for change. When we look at history, we can see that nations do change. Poland has changed, for example, from the 1980s to today. There’s a completely different mentality here than the one I encountered when I first visited, in 1988. The current generation sees the world through a different frame. So no, I don’t believe that certain nations are doomed to authoritarianism, or to anything. Of course, there are political and cultural traditions, but they can always be challenged. JC: So do you think there’s something intrinsic in human nature that pushes people to democracy, freedom? AA: I think there is something in human nature, a deep instinct, that pushes people towards freedom, yes. People who live in authoritarian countries – and I’ve heard this from them over and over again – sooner or later find themselves angered by a feeling of helplessness. They can see the unfairness of crooked courts, irrational political decisions. They naturally dislike the fact that somebody has all the power while they have none. In those circumstances, people who have no political background at all sometimes are politicized just by that frustration. I’m thinking of Svetlana Tikhanovskaya, for example, who was a Belarusian housewife, until the circumstances of her husband’s arrest forced her to become a politician. I met a woman who is a Uyghur from China, and who had come to live in Turkey. After several of her family members were arrested, she too was propelled into a political role. These kinds of experiences make people interested in democracy or political reform, even if they thought they didn’t care. I also think that the opposite is true: some people instinctively prefer homogeneity, order, hierarchy. They don’t like the confrontation of opinions or the noise of debate, and they lean towards a single leader or a unified regime. I think that most of modern history is shaped by the clash between those two different sides of human nature. JC: Which force do you find more powerful today? AA: I think they both have a lot of power and there’s no way of predicting who wins. Even in countries that seem very shut off or stuck in an authoritarian system can change. We’ve seen that happen. And vice versa, I think democracies can also begin to fail and slide into authoritarianism. So it’s very important not to be complacent in either direction. JC: I want to go into your history and your experiences. You’ve lived in Russia during a time of incredible change in the late 80s, and then you came back to do research in post-Soviet Russia. AA: I was a student in Russia just before the collapse of the Soviet Union. I then traveled and worked there extensively in the 1990s, and I met people who really were full of hope. They hoped that Russia could become a democracy, or at least a place that guaranteed freedom of speech, freedom of the press. These weren’t ideas that came from Washington. Although now the narrative in the Kremlin is different, I met many people who were working towards exactly that kind of transformation. A friend of mine ran a series of seminars – once a year, and then later several times a year, in cities all over Russia – designed to get people to discuss politics in new ways. She invited young politicians and journalists, as well as foreigners. I went to many of them, in Moscow as well as Volgograd and Novosibirsk. Over two decades, hundreds of people came to these seminars, and all of them wanted Russia to be different. I remain convinced that many Russians still want Russia to be different. It’s just that the old system, in the form of Putin, a representative of that system, returned. The KGB reimposed their power. And this wasn’t because of something to do with culture, this was to do with money and politics, and who was in charge. JC: You’ve partially answered my question... I wanted to ask whether that excitement of the 1990s was an exception from the Russian historical norm which has been rather authoritarian? AA: Of course, if you look at the history of Russia since the 18th century, there have always been liberal groups, reformers and revolutionaries. There were the Decembrists, in the early 19th century, and the rural populists later on, who tried to organize the peasantry. A significant group of liberal Russians appeared at the turn of the 20th century, people like the father of the writer Vladimir Nabokov, who was a Russian politician before the revolution. These groups were small in number, but sometimes had a broader significance. The Russian dissident movement in the 1950s and 1960s actually invented the modern human rights movement. It was their idea to hold the leaders of the Soviet Union accountable for the language they used, to remind them of the treaties they had signed and the promised they had made. They created the Helsinki group, for example, that held Soviet leadership to the language of the Helsinki Treaty, which formally ended the Second World War and which contained guarantees of human rights, at least on paper. That idea spread to Eastern Europe, and similar tactics were used here in Poland. (Benjamin Nathans recently wrote a great book about the Soviet dissidents, To the Success of Our Hopeless Cause) JC: But seemingly, even if they do ever get power, they could never hold on to it. AA: We don’t know, because they have never really had power. But in any case, we also don’t know what will happen in the future. There is no reason to assume that Russia will forever be condemned to totalitarianism. Even during the first fifteen years of Putin’s regime there was some form of democratic politics. Only when the full-scale war began did he bring everything to an end: he shut down all remaining independent organizations and killed his most important opponent, Alexi Navalny. But does that mean he is popular, that he enjoys legitimacy? Even now, we don’t really know what Russians think about him, or about the war. There is no way of doing real polling in Russia because nobody will answer an independent pollster over the phone. JC: Do you think that the flock of young people, especially young men, who fled Russia after the start of the war represent a continuation of liberal movements that refuse to partake in the authoritarian state, or do you think they are moving for the sake of self-preservation – “I don’t want to go to the army, so I leave”? AA: I’m sure it’s both. I actually know many people who left Russia for political reasons either in the very last years before the war, or else just after the war began. JC: And do you see a change in the young generation versus the old one that have fled? AA: It’s hard for me to say because the people who I know were mostly already politicized. I do know some younger people who left, but most of them were already either active in the opposition, or working as journalists. Many of them very self-consciously think of themselves as maintaining Russian culture abroad, just as in the 20th century the Soviet dissidents or the anti-communist White Russians once thought of themselves as people who maintained the true Russian culture, outside of Bolshevik Russia. JC: Let’s move on to Poland. One of your first experiences with Poland was reporting on Margaret Thatcher’s first state visit, in the autumn of 1988. You followed her around the farmers’ market. AA: She was making a symbolic gesture. She wanted to welcome free markets, but the only one she could really visit was the farmers’ market at Hala Mirowska. JC: And I want to talk about this area because today you can look out of any window in that district, Mirów, and see rows and rows of skyscrapers. How does it feel to see a country built from the ground in such a short time, both politically and economically? AA: You know, when you’re living in a period of dramatic change, it’s always hard to know whether the change is positive or negative. The transformation in Poland created winners and losers, as well as new classes of people, new political movements of different kinds. At the time, it sometimes just felt like turbulence. Now, we can look back at the 1990s and early 2000s in Poland and see in retrospect that the country was headed in towards prosperity and European integration. In around 2009 or 2010, I remember speaking to a woman who worked cleaning government offices, and who asked me if her daughter should study in Amsterdam or in London. This seemed to me to be a real transformation, and it happened very fast: within a few years, Poles stopped feeling like second-class Europeans, and a generation of younger Poles appeared who had no qualms about crossing borders. JC: We again live in turbulent times. Do you think we’re heading towards positive outcomes? AA: I can’t make predictions, because everything that happens tomorrow depends on what people do today. Also, history doesn’t have a trajectory. It doesn’t move in a particular direction. You only think it does afterwards. As I said, you can look afterwards at Poland in the 1990s and you could say this was a period of great progress. But not everybody at the time saw that. Sometimes people are very wrong about a given country’s trajectory. I remember people writing about Ukraine in the 1990s, about how dangerous it was that Ukraine was independent, that this was going to be an anti-semitic state, that Ukrainian nationalism was going to come back... and although you can say many bad things about Ukraine, the country made many bad choices, actually it became a pretty tolerant state which now has a Jewish president and until recently a Muslim defense minister. JC: In the 1990s Poland’s and Ukraine’s GDP were roughly similar. Ukraine was even a bit richer. So the starting point was similar for both of these countries, but they’ve turned out very, very differently. Even if we stop in 2014. Why do you think Ukraine “chose East”? Was it external influence? AA: No, I think Ukraine was in a different position. First of all, central and eastern Ukraine had been part of the Soviet Union since the 1920s, and had therefore experienced a longer period of occupation, repression, Sovietization and even Russification. Ukraine did not have, as Poland did, an alternative elite: a large cadre of economists and politicians, who already had some experience in opposition politics and in independent thinking. In Poland, the transformative finance minister, Leszek Balcerowicz, had already thought about how an economy might be decentralized before he took office. We can argue about how successful he was, but at least he was prepared to try something new. In Ukraine, people weren’t prepared. For one, there hadn’t been much space even for an illegal opposition in the previous couple of decades. Ukraine was also in many ways still emerging from colonial occupation. For the previous couple of centuries, many of the most capable Ukrainians had moved to Russia, and the first generation of leaders in independent Ukraine tended to be former Soviet apparatchiks. They didn’t immediately seek to become closer to western Europe. Instead, they looked for some kind of economic and political “third way” and an accomodation with Russia. Ukraine became stuck in this position, half-in, half-out and became pretty profoundly corrupt. JC: The Polish alternative elite had a vision of where they wanted the country to go. I think the general perception now is that this vision ends with the next election, right? Is this a natural process of gaining power? AA: Their vision, and it was shared by the time by politicians who now call themselves both left and right, was that Poland should join the EU and NATO, as fast as possible. My husband (Radek Sikorski) was in the very first government that said it wanted to join NATO. At the time this was taken very badly in Washington: the demand for NATO membership absolutely came from Poland, not from the US. But even then, in the early 1990s, many Poles already understood that the Russian sphere of influence would grow once again, that it was important to become part of the transatlantic alliance and an integrated Europe as fast as possible: NATO, the EU, the Council of Europe, all of the trading and security alliances. That consensus lasted through several different governments and over many years, even governments containing former communists. For twenty years, right, left and center disagreed about many things, but they all agreed on the direction that the country should go. In retrospect, that consensus created the basis for prosperity in Poland. JC: And regarding the Polish-Ukrainian relations. We know that antagonisms, e.g. the myth of Wołyń [a massacre of Poles that took place in what is now Western Ukraine, in 1943] are increasingly used in Polish political discourse today. In Ukraine, nationalist historians make heroes out of UPA, the Ukrainian revolutionary army, which is held responsible for this tragedy. Where do you see a start for burying the hatchet? Is the reconciliation of our nations possible? AA: So here’s a strange thing: For more than a decade after they both gained independence, Poland and Ukraine participated in a number of projects that were designed to solve exactly these kinds of Polish-Ukrainian differences. Books were published that were jointly written by Polish and Ukrainian historians, monuments were built. These projects were successful: If you’d asked me this question in 2010, I would have said that there are no real historical issues between Poland and Ukraine, that the two countries had mostly reconciled. For a number of reasons, this began to shift. In Poland, children and grandchildren of victims of the Wołyń massacre felt their tragedy hadn’t been fully recognized. In Ukraine, nationalist groups wanted the UPA partisans who had fought against the Soviet Union recognized for their heroism, despite the fact that some in this broad and not well-defined group were also linked to Wołyń. In both eastern Poland and western Ukraine, the memory of the ethnic cleansing that took place there in the late 1940s - Poles were moved West, Ukrainians East - to accomodate new borders has left feelings of displacement and bitterness. The wave of Ukrainian immigration, which started before the war, may have provoked some of this. But don’t underestimate the role played by Russia, which has always wanted to create discord between Poland and Ukraine, and pumps out propaganda to that effect in both countries. Vandalism on both sides of the border, damage done to cemeteries and monuments, is sometimes carried out by provacateurs working for Russia, just to create bad feelings. The Polish-Ukrainian conflict also hides a different reality: although there are real grievances and bad memories, the truth is that the biggest tragedies both nations experienced in the twentieth century were inflicted by the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany. That should unite these two countries, not divide them. JC: This week (19.04.2026 – Ed.) in Hungary we saw that using historical narratives to create grievance has no longer worked. Are you optimistic about the direction after Orban’s loss? AA: The Hungarian election was really important because it shows that people can actually resist powerful, dominant propaganda. The ruling party Fidesz controlled all of the TV, 90% of the newspapers, the constitutional court, the bureaucracy... and yet people had the nerve to vote against it and resist it. It’s also an important election because Hungary created a huge network of well-funded think tanks and foundations that were funding other far right groups and projects. So that loss is going to have a knock-on effect in other places too, maybe even in Poland. JC: What you’ve said about resisting propaganda reminds me of one of the interviews you did about talking to Russians in the post-Soviet era who claimed that people knew that the system was lying. Why do people choose to believe in these regimes anyway? AA: Because it’s useful. Stephen Kotkin, an American historian, once described how people would learn how to “speak Bolshevik”: It was just a language that you needed to use in order to get by in society. If you didn’t talk the way the regime wanted you to talk, then you might have problems, or lose your job, or your kids would not get into university. It was a way of getting along. Communist Poland was similar, at least in the early years. When I was writing a book about the Sovietization of Eastern Europe after World War II, I met a lot of people who wanted to talk a lot about the war, when many of them had done really heroic things. But almost nobody wanted to talk about the decade afterwards, between 1945 and 1956. This was when you had the short period of terror, violence and Polish Stalinism. To stay safe, people felt the need to just go along with what others were saying, or stay out of politics, or use communist jargon without necessarily believing it. I don’t judge them for it, and I wouldn’t describe all of those people as collaborators. It’s easy to feel moral certainty in retrospect, because we know that communism ended. But if you were living in 1949, it might not have been clear to you that communism was going to end. In very repressive societies, maybe about 10% of people who are really evil – collaborators, torturers. Maybe 10% of people are really brave and who find ways to resist. And then around 80% of people have kids, they have parents, they have to have jobs and they’ve had to get through it somehow. Strange though it may sound, I’ve found that the work I did on that book is now very useful in explaining some of what’s going on in the United States today. There are plenty of members of the Republican Party in Congress who know perfectly well that Donald Trump says many things that aren’t true. But they avoid criticizing him because it’s inconvenient, because they would get in trouble, because someone would attack them on the internet. So actually you don’t even need mass terror to get people to conform. JC: Is Gen Z reinventing agency? AA: We’ll see. In any generation you can find groups of people who want agency. If you live in a society that’s unfair, for example where a tiny number of people have captured most of the wealth, then at a certain point people rebel. This is always easier for younger people, who have you have less to lose. The question now is how the internet will affect the relationships between citizens and the state, and how it will change organizations. The “Twitter revolutions” people spoke about as early as 2008-9, mass protests organized online, have often proved to be very superficial. Although you can easily join something just by clicking, the work of creating a real movement requires physical participation. Successful mass movements of the past, for example the Civil Rights movement in the United States, were built by people who had spent many years together. They had participated in non-violent workshops together. They practiced and prepared. Just using the you can get everybody to show up at a certain moment, but then when the protest is broken up, nothing happens. It’s also true that the repressive regimes have more recently learned how to use the internet to undermine leaders and movements. Most of all, they now understand how to make people cynical. The form of propaganda that most modern authoritarians use - and I think the Russians really pioneered this - deploys sneering cynicism. Instead of praising the rulers, the regime propagandists mock the opposition movement leadership for being supposedly corrupt or sexually degenerate, with the goal of undermining any kind of idealism. JC: MAGA grew on the internet? AA: MAGA is a real grassroots movement. They had symbols, red hats, they showed up at rallies. But you’re right that the cynicism, the sarcasm and the distrust that the movement embodies came originally from the internet, and this is different. Fifty years ago, most European political parties had a social base in real organizations, in trade unions for Social Democrats, in church groups for Christian Democrats. As people stopped going to church and as the trade unions became smaller, the social base of these parties disappeared. Now people who wouldn’t have known one another in the past meet on the internet and create new movements, many of which don’t last. JC: Is history ending? Going in stale circles? AA: History never ends. In truth, human beings want contradictory things at the same time: order and freedom, stability and change. These things are never resolved, and when a society swings too far in one direction, people always push it the other way. But each time that happens, the result is different. Certainly it is true that we are now in a period when old philosophers and ideas from the 1930s are undergoing a revival. Carl Schmitt, who was a philosopher who was very influential on the Nazis, is back as an influence on both the far left and the far right, once again inspiring people to think that all politics has to be existential, that all politics is about defining and defeating enemies. In the US, some are also bringing back dominionism, the idea that we need a Christian and not a secular state. It’s also true that we are living through a more fundamental shift. The old left-right divide, which was mostly about the size of the state, is much less important now. Instead, we are arguing about more fundamental things: what are our rights, what protects our freedom. Or how much power do we want to give small elites, versus how much power to give ordinary people. In America a small group of very wealthy people now control information, because they control the social media platforms and AI, which means they determine what people will read and learn. Finding a way to preserve preserve zones of autonomy and independent thinking, this is going to be the main task for the next generation. JC: What is the one book that a person interested in Central Europe should read? AA: You could read my book “Iron Curtain: the Crushing of Eastern Europe” which tells the story of how the Soviet Union imposed its culture on the region. Or read Tim Snyder’s history of the region, “The Reconstruction of Nations: Poland, Ukraine, Lithuania, Belarus 1569-1999.” And everyone should read “The Captive Mind” by Czesław Miłosz, which describes exactly the phenomenon we were talking about: why do people collaborate? I joined Scott Galloway and the brilliant Fiona Hill in a discussion about the wars in Ukraine and Iran, the future of global power, and what these conflicts reveal about America's role in the world. Scott told us that this was the 400th edition of his podcast, which is quite a number: My friend Francesco Chiamulera runs a brilliant series of literary events, Una Colline di Libri, A Hill of Books, in the Prosecco Hills, a region of vineyards and elegant hill towns in the Veneto, north of Venice. We did an event in Vittorio Veneto and also drove and biked around the countryside. Buy Autocracy Inc Buy Iron Curtain Open Letters, from Anne Applebaum is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Subscribe
Tom Hardy’s debut rap album has officially dropped — and yes, he does the Bane voice
The “MobLand” actor moonlights as a rapper under the name Frankie Pulitzer.
Pat Oliphant, fearless Pulitzer-winning political cartoonist, dies at 90
PHOENIX (AP) — Pat Oliphant, an influential political cartoonist known for creating caricatures of U.S. and world leaders, died Monday. He was 90.
Annie Dillard, Pulitzer-winning author of 'Pilgrim at Tinker Creek,' dies at 81
Annie Dillard, the Pulitzer Prize-winning author known for her poetic explorations of nature and spirituality, has died at 81 | NewsRadio 1080 KRLD
Pulitzer Prize-winning science author to give lecture at SUNY Plattsburgh
PLATTSBURGH — New Yorker Magazine staff writer and science reporter Elizabeth Kolbert will be on the SUNY Plattsburgh campus for a discussion on how her Pulitzer Prize-winning book, “The Sixth
ENTERTAINMENT: WAC hosts Australian Chamber Orchestra
The Australian Chamber Orchestra is premiering “Horizon,” a new work it commissioned from Pulitzer- and Grammy-winning composer John Luther Adams, on its current tour. It includes an 8 p.m. concert Saturday at Fayetteville’s Walton Arts Center
The Blade | Toledo's breaking news, sports, and entertainment watchdog
A Pulitzer Prize winner, The Blade covers Toledo's news, sports, weather and entertainment scene, including most of northwest Ohio and southeast Michigan
Los Angeles Clippers revive ClipperVision for 2026-27 season
Well, there’s at least one good thing about the 2026-2027 NBA season involving the Los Angeles Clippers: ClipperVision is back. The Clippers have had a unique stretch over the last year. Between Chris Paul’s aborted retirement run, an epic collapse to end the season, a quick playoff exit, the cloud of Pablo Torre’s Pulitzer-winning report…
Pat Oliphant, prizewinning giant of political cartooning, dies at 90
The Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonist skewered presidents from Johnson to Trump, reaching a vast audience through syndication.
Seattle philanthropist, Pulitzer-winning playwright open new theater center
Grace Nordhoff, daughter of Hedgebrook co-founder Nancy Nordhoff, helps launch new Cape Cod theater retreat Bards on the Bay.
Forward Theater highlights an immigrant story in ‘Ironbound’
Forward Theater opens “Ironbound” by Pulitzer Prize-winning playwright Martyna Majok in the Overture Center Playhouse on Jan. 29, running through Feb. 15.
ENTERTAINMENT: Jazz at the Joint, TheatreSquared seasons scheduled
TheatreSquared opens its 2026-27 Main Stage season Sept. 9-27 with the Pulitzer Prize and Tony Award-winning play "Fences" by August Wilson.
AI Prognosis: Who's keeping tabs on how health insurers are using AI?
In this edition, AI Prognosis talks to STAT's Casey Ross, a Pulitzer finalist laser-focused on health insurers' use of AI, and more.
Annie Dillard, Pulitzer-winning author of ‘Pilgrim at Tinker Creek,’ dies at 81
Annie Dillard, the Pulitzer Prize-winning author known for her poetic explorations of nature and spirituality, has died at 81.
John Noble Wilford, Times Reporter Who Covered the Moon Landing, Dies at 92
He gave readers a comprehensive and lyrical account of the historic mission in 1969. His science coverage as a Pulitzer-winning journalist and an author took him around the world.
Tony Awards 2026: Bess Wohl's Pulitzer-Prize-winning 'Liberation' is crowned best play
'Liberation,' Bess Wohl's playful imagining of her mother's feminist consciousness-raising group in 1970s Ohio, deservedly wins the Tony for best play
ENTERTAINMENT: Jazz at the Joint, TheatreSquared seasons scheduled
TheatreSquared opens its 2026-27 Main Stage season Sept. 9-27 with the Pulitzer Prize and Tony Award-winning play "Fences" by August Wilson.
Annie Dillard, Pulitzer-winning author of 'Pilgrim at Tinker Creek,' dies at 81
Annie Dillard, the Pulitzer Prize-winning author known for her poetic explorations of nature and spirituality, has died at 81.
Annie Dillard, Pulitzer-winning author of 'Pilgrim at Tinker Creek,' dies at 81
Annie Dillard, the Pulitzer Prize-winning author known for her poetic explorations of nature and spirituality, has died at 81 | KYW Newsradio
Netflix And Teton Ridge Entertainment Partner On New Lonesome Dove Series
Zoe Kazan and Jeb Stuart to adapt Larry McMurtry's Pulitzer Prize-winning western Lonesome Dove in partnership with Teton Ridge Entertainment and Netflix.
Nina Dietz to Discuss the Public Health Impacts of Wildfires at the Milken Institute
Image The Department of Global Health at George Washington University’s Milken Institute School of Public Health will host Pulitzer Center grantee and freelance journalist Nina Dietz at a Research and Practice Seminar. On Thursday, November 12, 2026, from 2:00pm-3:00pm EST, Dietz will present on her Pulitzer Center-supported project The Toxic Side of Climate Change. The project investigates the hazards left behind by urban wildfires in Los Angeles and examines the long-term risks these toxins pose to affected communities. The project also explores what remains in the ash and debris after a fire, and how those materials impact public health. Dietz is a writer, documentarian, and journalist reporting from a background rooted in both science and the humanities. Her work has appeared in New Lines Magazine, Inside Climate News, Science Friday, and at Photoville, among others.
SIU’s Simon Institute hosts Pulitzer Prize-winning scholar on nation’s political contradictions
Paul Starr, a Pulitzer Prize-winning scholar at Princton University and the founding co-editor of The American Prospect magazine, will join Southern Illinois University Carbondale’s Paul Simon Public Policy Institute for a virtual conversation on Tuesday, Dec. 9.
Spurred by Pulitzer Prize-winner's visit, business leaders grapple with state's housing crisis
The capital of Georgia — a city of more than 500,000 people nearly 1,200 miles away, where African-Americans outnumber their white counterparts — bears a striking similarity to New Hampshire’s capital. In Atlanta, like in Concord and countless municipalities across the country, housing costs have far eclipsed what working people can afford. Brian Goldstone, journalist […]
Video: Why the N.B.A. Banned the Richest Owner in U.S. Sports
A yearlong league probe, sparked by Pablo Torre’s Pulitzer Prize-winning investigation, found that the billionaire Los Angeles Clippers owner Steve Ballmer helped to secure endorsement deals for star Kawhi Leonard, breaking salary cap rules.
Mike Bolton, award-winning Birmingham News sports and outdoors writer, dies at 70
Was nominated for Pulitzer Prize for 1996 series on Cahaba River
Spurred by Pulitzer Prize-Winner’s Visit, Business Leaders Grapple With State’s Housing Crisis: Business NH Magazine
Brian Goldstone, journalist and author of the Pulitzer Prize-winning There Is No Place for Us: Working and Homeless in America, spoke during an Oct. 15 forum, hosted by the Greater Concord Chamber of Commerce and the Concord Coalition to End Homelessness.
Pat Oliphant, fearless Pulitzer-winning political cartoonist, dies at 90
Pat Oliphant, one of the most influential political cartoonists, has died at 90
Rick Bragg returns to Acadiana for book festival: ‘Wouldn't it be good to be Cajun for one day?'
He tried to eat his way out of a broken heart in Acadiana once. Now Pulitzer Prize winner Rick Bragg is coming back — and this time he's bringing his stories to Books Along the Teche Literary Festival in New Iberia.
Business journalism studies took her to the White House | UNC Hussman School of Journalism and Media
The story by UNC Hussman alumni Brennan Doherty ’19 and video by John Roberts ’16 (M.A.) was originally published on unc.edu. This story is part of a four-part series on Carolina alumni working in Washington, D.C. Soon after her 2015 graduation from UNC-Chapel Hill, Megan Cassella was an intern for the Reuters news agency, eagerly awaiting and prepping for a special assignment. “Every now and then they needed an intern to run over to the White House last minute,” Cassella said. “You have to send your information the night before, so I started proactively sending my information to the White House every single night to be able to go the next day if they ever needed an intern.” Since then, she’s made many return trips to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. in a career that’s included roles at Reuters, Politico, Barron’s and now CNBC, where she works as an on-air Washington correspondent. A longtime newswriter, Cassella made the move to TV in 2024, appearing on broadcasts multiple times daily to report on the biggest political and business stories. But the keys to doing a good job — knowing how to research, asking insightful questions, building relationships and explaining complex topics to a broad audience — remain the same. Did you know: Outside of the state of North Carolina, the Washington region is home to the largest concentration of Tar Heel alumni in the country. Cassella’s time as a Tar Heel was crucial in sharpening those skills, both in the UNC Hussman School of Journalism and Media and through roles at student-run publications like The Daily Tar Heel. She excelled in Carolina’s business journalism program with former professor Chris Roush, which led to an internship at The Charlotte Observer and helped Cassella find her journalistic niche. A data journalism course with Associate Professor Ryan Thornburg taught her how to find stories in numbers, and former professor Paul O’Connor’s reporting class took Cassella to the North Carolina Capitol weekly, where she gained invaluable experience interviewing politicians. “Those hands-on experiences that Carolina gave me really kept my interest and have really benefited me since I’ve been up here in D.C.,” said Cassella. “I have UNC to thank for the fact that I even went into business journalism in the first place.” Megan Cassella ’15 “You’ve got to thrive on adrenaline in this job. You’ve got to do well with last-minute changes, with running by the seat of your pants.” Megan Cassella ’15 ‘There’s nothing else like it’ In recent months, Cassella has reported live from the G7 Summit in Geneva, covered the latest developments in the U.S.-Iran war and followed changes to trade policy, including tariffs. “Anything in this realm that influences Wall Street, I’ll be covering,” Cassella said. Her working hours are long and variable. After waking up, Cassella immediately checks her phone to see what news broke overnight. By 8:15 a.m., she usually learns which newscasts she’ll be on, and then she heads to the newsroom, White House or wherever her assignment is. “We want you in the 9 a.m. show and the 11, and then the 3 o’clock show wants you, too,” Cassella said, referring to a hypothetical day. If Cassella gets an exclusive or major news breaks, she might be told, “We want that on TV right now.” Within five minutes, she’d be expected to get to the camera, figure out what to say and deliver the news to a live audience. “It’s exciting. It’s nerve-wracking,” Cassella said. “But there’s nothing else like it.” A well-rounded education Cassella grew up in Maryland, the youngest of four kids. Her oldest brother, Brian Cassella ’05, attended Carolina, became a photojournalist and recently won a Pulitzer Prize. She remembers visiting campus as a young child and loving it. “I just always wanted to go,” she said, and that desire grew when she, like her brother, gravitated toward journalism. But it wasn’t just the journalism school that drew Cassella to Carolina. “It was also the whole liberal arts curriculum,” she said. “Even though I always wanted to be a journalist, I got to college, and I sort of felt I had to think about other things. I had to explore my options and see if that’s what I really wanted.” Did you know: In April UNC-Chapel Hill opened its Carolina in the Capital office in Washington. She combined her journalism schooling with a global studies major and a history minor. That broad range of academic experiences in Chapel Hill molded her, preparing Cassella for a career that’s taken her to the highest levels of political journalism and inside the Oval Office. “When you sit back and remember you’re actually sitting inside the White House and asking questions of the president, it’s a cool feeling,” Cassella said. “No matter who is in office, no matter what administration or party, it’s a privilege to be there.” Megan Cassella on… Being a Tar Heel in Washington: I run into Tar Heels all the time. My husband’s a Tar Heel. We actually met here in Washington, not at Carolina, even though we were the same class. Probably most of our friends are still Tar Heels. Even up here in D.C., we all get together for games and March Madness. And through work, there’s Tar Heels all over the place. It’s often used as a connection. Favorite Franklin Street spot: When we go back, our first stop is always IP3. That’s more my husband’s doing than mine. In college, I was a huge Spanky’s fan. Felt like it was a classic spot. May it rest in peace. Advice to journalism students: Reps, reps, reps! Nothing beats the experience you’ll gain by simply starting to do the work — asking the questions, reporting and writing the stories, doing the TV hits. When you can, go places in person. Talk to more people than you think you’ll need. Read as much as you can, from different sources and on different topics. If you’re not sure how to start your story, that usually means you need more reporting. When you’re not sure, ask.
Annie Dillard, Pulitzer-winning author of 'Pilgrim at Tinker Creek,' dies at 81
Annie Dillard, the Pulitzer Prize-winning author known for her poetic explorations of nature and spirituality, has died at 81 | WBBM Newsradio 780 AM & 105.9 FM
Dan Eggen, who shaped politics coverage at The Post, dies at 60
He helped guide Pulitzer Prize-winning projects, including coverage of Russian election interference in 2016 and the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.
Pulitzer Prize winner shares historic nature of politics as U.S. celebrates 250th anniversary
Pulitzer Prize-winning historian and New York Times bestselling author Jon Meacham discussed the nature of American politics through pivotal moments in U.S. history. Meacham said that the nation was originally founded on the notion of politics as “an aspirational arena of contention,” where different interests were disputed before reaching a consensus. He added that conflicts regarding power and other matters are inevitable.