Early last month, based on a list assembled (not completely correctly, as it turned out) by Editor & Publisher, Gawkers Balk and Choire sat down to handicap the Pulitzer race. [UPDATE: YES EDITOR & PUBLISHERS WAS ALMOST COMPLETELY CORRECT, FINE, STOP EMAILING US. (Apparently the prize board moved some things or something.) ANYWAY WE HAIL YOU, GREG MITCHELL AND STAFF, YOU ARE PULITZER KINGS!!] Well, the prizes have been awarded. How'd we do?
INVESTIGATIVE REPORTING: The Birmingham (Ala.) News
Balk said: Hartford Courant
Choire said: Hartford Courant
Balk: 2, Choire: 2
Note: The Birmingham (Ala.) News wasn't on the list we were going from. Not that it would have made a difference.
So there you have it: Out of nine categories upon which we speculated, we were able to accurately predict less than half. In addition, we made exactly the same choices for every category. Why yes, we do cycle together! Things get ugly around here during the full moon. Also, we are not very good judges of what gets a Pulitzer. As we warned in the first place, our guesses were "lengthy, ill-informed, and almost certain to be incorrect." So, hey, we were right about that!