Tom the Dancing Bug deserved the Pulitzer, obviously

Originally published at: Tom the Dancing Bug deserved the Pulitzer, obviously | Boing Boing


I wonder what the next TDB will be about? /s


But it’s also a year where everything in politics went wild, and there is a desire among journalists, especially at old media, to return to the old normal. And this means forgetting it ever happened.

This is very insightful and speaks to the larger danger inherent in the old-line corporate media’s approach. Pretending that the last four years were an anomaly rather than one stage in a 40-year lead-up to fascism in America means that they’re already ignoring on-going and future dangers in favour of getting back to a normal that already wasn’t sustainable a decade ago.


I could venture a guess…


Tom The Dancing Bug regular character Lucky Ducky is based on the widely mocked Wall Street Journal editorial page whining about “lucky duckies” who don’t earn enough to pay taxes.

Those people are notoriously thin skinned grudge holders. Bret Stephens, who famously tried to get a professor punished for joking about him being a bed bug, was a WSJ editorial staff writer and has warned people that he extracts retribution – in the form of prizes denied – for crossing him.Stephens is close enough to the Pulitzer Board that he was set to join it until he took a job at the NY Times and couldn’t take the position because another Times writer had a slot.

The Washington Post used to run TDB every Friday, but suddenly dropped it when he criticized Cheney one time too many, back when the Post was in the pocket of the neocons –

Which is all to say, the strip makes good enemies.

Did any of them scorch his chances? The ironically (for a press award) non-transparent Pulitzer board will never say. Maybe they were so taken with all three nominees that they just couldn’t pick anyone for the first time in 48 years.


A badge of honour, if not an award.



Sorry to double post this, but their decision to give it to no one rather than give it to Ruben Bolling genuinely ticks me off.


Maybe the Pulitzer board longs for the old days of single-panel political cartoons on the editorial page, a la Jeff McNelly or Paul Conrad, both of whom we’re great. But that medium is back there with daguerreotypes and heliographs: i.e., over.


The Pulitzers are rigged, wherein the elite decide which of their own to appear to honor. Which is to say claims of quality are suspect. For example, the Times always wins at least one because it must.
So Bolling came close but wasn’t chosen as a winner. Par for this course.


Disgraceful. Shame.




That’s just roundly fucked. If they didn’t want to give the award, weird but OK, but then …don’t announce a list of finalists?

I dunno, perhaps some arcane rule says there’s no winner if the cat’s entrails fall in the shape of the holy cross or something. But to an outside observer, they’ve just gone and singled out each of the finalists specifically to shit on them. Those board members should be stripped of their Tiaras of Augustness and forced to don the Sweatband of Being a Rude Asshole.


This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.