E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Penguin Group (USA)
The book jacket of Jonah Goldberg's "The Tyranny of Clichés: How Liberals Cheat in the War of Ideas" describes him as twice nominated for a Pulitzer Prize. The publisher said Tuesday it would remove the claim. He was one of thousands of entrants, not a nominated finalist.
On the dust jacket of his new book, "The Tyranny of Clichés: How Liberals Cheat in the War of Ideas," best-selling conservative author and commentator Jonah Goldberg is described as having "twice been nominated for a Pulitzer Prize."
In fact, as Goldberg acknowledged on Tuesday, he has never been a Pulitzer nominee, but is merely one of thousands of entrants.
When this bit of résumé inflation was pointed out by a reporter for msnbc.com, Goldberg said he hadn't meant to mislead anyone and removed the Pulitzer claim from his bio at National Review Online. (Here's the page before and now.) And he added, "I never put it in the bio in the first place."
His publisher, Penguin Group (USA), said the error was unintentional and it would remove the Pulitzer word from his book jacket when it's time for the first reprint, "just like any other innocent mistake brought to our attention." (Update: On Wednesday morning, the publisher removed the claim from its own website.)
What's surprising in Goldberg's case is that he has been called out for the same résumé padding before, when his previous book was published.
Goldberg's "The Tyranny of Clichés" was published May 1 and is ranked in the top 100 in sales on Amazon. A fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, Goldberg is the founding editor of National Review Online. He is a Fox News contributor, and has appeared as a guest on MSNBC and NBC. (Msnbc.com is a joint venture of NBCUniversal and Microsoft.)
An entry form and $50
It's not uncommon for Pulitzer entrants to claim to be nominees. Here's how it works: Though there are only three nominees, known as nominated finalists, in each Pulitzer category each year, there are more than 2,000 entrants. One could say that all of them were "nominated" by someone. If all Pulitzer entrants could be called nominees, any publisher could give all its authors that honorific by submitting an entry form and a check for $50.
The Pulitzer rules make clear that the only people to be known as nominees are those finalists chosen by the Pulitzer juries. From those nominated finalists, the Pulitzer board chooses the winners. Everyone else is just an entrant. As the Pulitzer board's online list of frequently asked questions explains politely, "Work that has been submitted for Prize consideration but not chosen as either a nominated finalist or a winner is termed an entry or submission. ... We discourage someone saying he or she was 'nominated' for a Pulitzer simply because an entry was sent to us."
Besides violating the official rules, such claims mislead the public. Tell readers that you're an Academy Awards nominee, and they'll understand that you're one of the few finalists, not one of the many entrants submitted by movie studios. It's exactly the same with the Pulitzers.
And in addition to misleading the public, such false claims rob honor from the actual nominees. This year's non-winning nominees include journalists and authors revealing failure to enforce safety standards at aging nuclear power plants, exploring the heartache of dealing with a sick spouse, and capturing in photographs the chaos and exuberance of the Arab Spring.
Being a "two-time Pulitzer Prize entrant" won't sell many books. Claims to Pulitzer nominations have showed up in the bios of well-known sportswriters Bill Plaschke and Buster Olney, NPR host Michele Norris and others not listed on the Pulitzer site among the nominees, including a good number of university professors.
(See below for a version of Where's Waldo: Find your own Pulitzer fakers by comparing Wikipedia bios with the list of nominees for recent years on the Pulitzer Prizes website.)
'I don't recall'
When Goldberg's "Liberal Fascism" came out in January 2008, his employer National Review Online announced that Tribune Media Services, which carries Goldberg's opinion columns, had "nominated" Goldberg for a Pulitzer in commentary.
The liberal blog Daily Kos then pointed out that the Tribune doesn't choose Pulitzer nominees, writing about "Goldberg's faux Pulitzer."
Commenters on Amazon took up the baton, attaching to Goldberg's Amazon profile several lengthy notes pointing out the puffery. The book sold well, reaching No. 1 on the New York Times hardcover list in March 2008.
A cartoon circulated mocking Goldberg for the claim. The punch line has Goldberg saying, as he opens a sweepstakes envelope, "I was just informed I might be winning ten million dollars." Here's a link to the online cartoon, by August J. Pollak, who draws "Some Guy With a Website."
After the hubbub, Goldberg's speaker's bureau removed the Pulitzer claim from his online bio, as documented by Daily Kos.
Goldberg told msnbc.com on Tuesday that he didn't recall any of this. "In all honesty, I don't recall ever being 'called' on this."
When contacted on Tuesday by email, Goldberg replied at first, "Nominated by the Tribune syndicate. Never said I was a finalist. There's a distinction."
When told that he's not a nominee either, and isn't listed among the nominees on the Pulitzer website, Goldberg replied, "I'll check it out and have 'em remove it if you're right. Happily. If it's not kosher, I shouldn't have it in there. Period."
Two hours later, after appearing on a radio show about the Tuesday primary voting, Goldberg sent a longer answer in email, but insisted that it be off the record. He was asked to provide a comment on the record, but declined.
'Just like any other innocent mistake'
Then, later Tuesday, his publisher issued a strong defense of Goldberg's integrity. Adrian Zackheim, president and publisher of Sentinel, an imprint of Penguin Group (USA), sent over this statement:
Penguin Group (USA)
The cover of Jonah Goldberg's "The Tyranny of Clichés: How Liberals Cheat in the War of Ideas."
"There's no conspiracy here, just an innocent mistake at worst. In casual conversation, whenever a news organization submits one of their writers for a prize, people say that person was nominated. By that standard Jonah Goldberg 'has twice been nominated for a Pulitzer Prize.' You've brought it to our attention that the Pulitzer authorities don't approve of that usage, and that technically Jonah was 'entered' but not 'nominated.'
"We appreciate the notice, and we will treat it just like any other innocent mistake brought to our attention, such as a misspelled name or factual error. Specifically, Sentinel will correct the reference on future printings of The Tyranny of Clichés, and we will submit the correction to online retailers like Amazon and Barnesandnoble.com, which use our flap copy for their descriptive copy. Jonah is also correcting any other bios that have the error.
"However, it would be completely inaccurate for you to conclude that there was any intent to inflate Jonah's credentials or deceive anyone. His credentials are extremely impressive already and don't require any extra hype."
Attached to the publisher's statement was an internal note from the Penguin publicist, cautioning author Goldberg not to say another word.
And there was a note from Goldberg himself to the publisher, an internal email forwarded by mistake: "I think it's great," Goldberg said, apparently referring to Zackheim's statement. "It's a bull@!$%# story and I think this walks the line between acting in good faith and making that clear."
Goldberg, 43, is a son of literary agent Lucianne Goldberg, who became known after she advised Linda Tripp to secretly tape record Monica Lewinsky's conversations about sex with President Bill Clinton. She now has her own website, Lucianne.com. Jonah Goldberg got his start as an aide to commentator Ben J. Wattenberg at the American Enterprise Institute. Goldberg's columns are syndicated to newspapers nationally. For $2,000 to $7,500 per person, one can accompany the "Pulitzer-nominated columnist" and others from the National Review on a cruise to the Bahamas and Grand Cayman. His many liberal targets have included former Vice President Al Gore, whom he derided as a "serial exaggerator."
Find your own non-nominee nominees
Readers, here's a link to people whose Wikipedia biographies contain the word "Pulitzer" and "nominee" or "nominated."
Which ones aren't real nominees?
Here's a search form for actual winners and nominated finalists at the Pulitzer Prizes site.
It can be tricky to tell who's fibbing. A group of newspaper reporters, even an entire staff of a newspaper, could be nominated finalists in a category, without being named individually on the Pulitzer site. And nominees have been announced only since 1980.
The key questions to be put to a claimant are these: In what year were you a Pulitzer Prize nominee, and in what category?
N.B. A couple of readers asked how this story got started, whether I was tipped off by some political opponent of Goldberg's. No, I was looking at the Amazon list of top-selling books, and wasn't sure if I recognized Goldberg's name. I clicked through, and saw his bio. As soon as I saw in the bio that he was a two-time Pulitzer nominee, I doubted it. -- Bill Dedman
Leave a Comment:
So typical and predictable. Another right-wing liar and hypocrite - is this really a surprise to anyone?
Lies on the outside of the book, lies on the inside of the book. Just more journalistic toilet paper from this fascist hack.
Yep... lies and distortions, such despicable behavior in journalism.
WAIT, are you talking about the NBC Producer in Miami who maliciously edited the 911 recording of the conversation with George Zimmerman, broadcast on the Today Show, to remove key parts of the conversation to attempt to portray Zimmerman as a racist?
A pretty significant event reported widely in much of the Media, but NO MENTION of this on MSNBC.
.
so publishers only do this for conservatives? read the whole article- lieberals do it they same. Liars are liars. do not fall into the trapp of "this week liars are all conservative". because next week when the report is about well know liberals are liars you will turn your selective reading on.
Now I have to go watch the John Edwards trial.....
John, just for the record: You're looking at msnbc.com, the news website, not MSNBC, the TV company. Surprisingly, these have always been different companies.
The Zimmerman-Martin error in transcription that you refer to was corrected on our site.
What's the problem? The Cheney Doctine explicitly states "Making a claim is what is significant not the underlying reality."
SInce Bush/Cheney modernized the loanguage they were able to separate wors from their underlying content - thus alllowing language to take it's real role as a "TOOL."e.g. There are WMD in IRaq doesn't -notr was it ever suppposed to - men there were adctuallly WMD in Iraq - what it reallly meant was . "We are going to launch an unwarrranted invasion of Iraq.
Both are terrible. Both individuals responsible should be held accountable. The NBC staffer and the author. An informed electorate needs high quality information, not lies.
Peg
How true.
Reminds me of the democratic senator Blumenthal who during his senate campaign boasted that he was a Vietnam Vet.
He is not and admitted it.
He said he was not a liar though. He was the victim of ..." a few misplaced words. "
Then there was the famous ..." I did not have sex with that woman " from a sitting president.
The point is that both sides are guilty.
Should we accept the lying? No.
We should give " credit " to both sides of the political spectrum when each is caught.
nnh, I have always said that Clinton did NOT have sex with that woman....since "having sex" is generally used to mean having intercourse. And what Goldberg's mother did, by advising Linda Tripp to betray her friend, is more despicable than any form of intimacy would have been.
In my experience, book covers that start with invective are typically full of .... on the inside and that generality is pretty much true on both sides of the aisle. These kinds of books don't sell well unless they provide a sensational viewpoint. The saddest part isn't the liberal (I'm not talking about the political definition in this instance of the word) use of "creative editorialism" by the author and/or publisher, but rather that anyone pays for books like these and actually takes them as truth. Apparently a large number of people are looking for edification of their pet beliefs regardless of the trustworthiness of the source.
Folks, it was the PUBLISHER, PENGUIN BOOKS who inflated the dust cover bio--chasing any marketing ploy that would raise visibility and therefore increase sales. Capitalism at its greatest--say anything that will lead to profit, truth be damned.
The dirty little not-so-secret is that the Pulitzers in journalism, along with Nieman fellowships and other journalism honors, are awarded by juries of insiders who confine the awards to fellow liberals. Occasionally they'll rope in a George Will to create the appearance of legitimacy, but the selection process is so notoriously fraudulent that many conservatives no longer bother to apply.
Which of course has nothing to do with his lying about his nominations but whatever excuse I guess is OK with you. :) Shame is he did and he got caught.
I'm shocked! Just shocked! You mean someone in the public realm has lied to me? And someone who writes about politics?
I'm speechless. My entire world is collapsing.
Why bother, anyway? I'm sure his readership has no idea what a Pulitzer is.
No suprise here. Repugs, Cons, and Tea Baggers lie as easily as they breathe air. When they make false claims they are just doing what comes natural to them.
Who cares? It's not a book any adult with more than 3 firing neurons would lay down money for.
Jeff-1592116, your first comment was deleted. You were making a point, and then you had to start calling another user a "moron." Stick to the high road. Feel free to try again.
I call it like I see it. :) But editing doesn't bother me so do as you see fit. I know it works both ways anyway.
Many Republicans seem to have a problem with the truth.
Hey Jonah, wanna know how one actually DOES "cheat in the war of ideas?"
Artificially inflate their resume on their book jackets to make them appear to be more mainstream and intelligent than they actually are (e.g., LIE)
Typical for a rightwinger...
Liar caught in the act of lying.
It's really funny because his book entitled "The Tyranny of Clichés: How Liberals Cheat in the War of Ideas" is exactly about the author and his fellow conservatives.
That's because they are always projecting. When they say something the truth is often the opposite, they accuse others of exactly what THEY are doing. I read Goldberg and he's a dink.
Ron Suskind, quoting an unnamed aide to George W. Bush (later attributed to Karl Rove[1]):
It's the GOP mantra. Accuse the other side of doing precisely what you're doing. Seriously.
There is lying, and then there is hypocrisy. While both are despicable, I find hypocrisy more so.
Journalism is dead, long live journalism. It died with the 2008 election
Oh, far right, it's always, always just an "innocent" mistake when you're called on your "inaccuracies" - even when done repeatedly - OR the "liberal" media's fault. He should team up with Ann Coulter and write another book. At least, intelligent people would know before reading that it was mostly a bunch of crap, simply providing a few good laughs.
You should see what our liberal media says. Funny they side with the socalled conservatives a lot.
As Stephen Colbert says, reality has a liberal bias.
No Peg this isn't a surprise. The right wing is totally made up of lies of one kind or another. From Rush Limbaugh telling only part of the story to Mitt Romney saying he worked to save the auto industry among other things.
Is anyone capable of telling the truth anymore?
Sissela Bok writes in Lying: Moral Choice in Public and Private Life:
I once read about the dynamic of lies and the consequences. This article will have to suffice as I can't find the other. I feel society is breaking down. When I see wealthy people and corporations walking away from devastating events with little or no consequences I wonder about the rule book. Tell me the rules...the new rules... so we can all play by them
Unfortunately the elite have different rules than the rest of us. If they screw up the economy or environment WE end up paying for it (in many ways, not just money). If we screw up we also pay for that. Win-win for the Illuminati. And they have lots of vacuous drones to protect them and make sure they get the government they buy - in other words, the dupes that vote against their own self interests.
Gee guess that makes me a Who's Who in my industry and also a "Pulitzer Nominee" I paid my money (bought my credentials). Oh my I didn't make it in Who's Who AND win the Pulitzer ok still looks good on my resume. LSOS!
God in a few years you will be able to purchase the "medal of honor" (note no caps for a reason-it seems WE DON'T HAVE ANY HONOR!
Is anyone capable of telling the truth anymore?
I actually agree about the honor. We are starting to have no honor. Telling lies and buying offices does not lead to honor. Degrading a president merely because you want to win that office does not lead or exemplify honor. We should all be standing behind or beside him and if we don't like his politics we can vote him out. But to do what the other side is doing which is getting repulsive does not lead to honor in any form. It shows how vicious and malicious the republican group can be. And people still vote for them. That doesn't lead to honor either. I have never seen a more repulsive ignorant block of voters. They will believe anything and repeat it.
Yes, and I don't find it so difficult.
kit, #3.1.......it is going to have to become so bad
that they will either smell their own stink or
finally drown in their same old pile of horse 5h17
while looking for the pony.
".. in a few years you will be able to purchase the "medal of honor"....."
It's already happened to the Nobel Peace Prize: Equating the truly noble accomplishments of Ghandi and Mother Teresa with the empty platitudes of Hope & Change has made the Nobel Peace Prize no more honorable than a piece of soiled bathroom tissue.
Really? He calls liberals cheats on the front and lies about his prowess on the back? LOL Way to raise you're credibility, Jonah. I watched "Biloxi Blues" (written long before the Internet was in general use) last night and was dumbfounded by the line that once something is written down it somehow becomes the truth in people's eyes. With the Internet available to nearly everyone the lies and people who succumb to them have grown exponentially. Remember when authors and reporters were among the most respected people? What a shame.
Sounds like Bill O'Reilly and the two Peabody awards that He didn't actually win while at Inside edition.
Check out "Lies and the lying lyers who tell them" by Al Franken, where he exposes many, many examples of how the right lies to manipulate public opinion.
ha-ha...what a fraud...and in typical Righty fashion, in the end, he doesnt admit any error in judgement.
Didn't Obama suggest that that wording go there? I thought he did!
Of course you thought he did, ktlin. Because you can't have an original thought about anything. Obsessed much?
Hey, liberal here.
There is plenty of this go around. Be careful where you're slinging that self-righteousness. The liberals do plenty of fabrication too. Especially in politics.
Caveat Emptor
And it's an "error" he would never have corrected had he not gotten caught.
"I have a secret plan to end the war in Viet Nam & when I am re-elected I will reveal it " (RMN)
"I am NOT a CROOK" (RMN)
"I never took any money from any Baltimore contractors... or anyone else !" Spiro T. Agnew
"There was never any quid pro quo, I pardoned Mr.Nixon so that the country can begin healing." Jerry Ford
" Richard Nixon will make a fine POTUS." Ike Eisenhower
All of my life I had been "forgiving" conservatives for outright lies,
fluoridation of water,
commie's taking over the country,
WMD's in Iraq,
ICBM gap,
America's Savings & loans are solvent,
Obama Is a Communist,
Obama is taking our guns away,
DEATH PANELS,
Pink Slime is GOOD for you,
Catsup is a Vegetable,
Ms. Palin will finish her term,
ROMNEY WON IOWA
.....it has gotten to the point that you cannot trust the report of a conservative death notice .
When did telling lies become the conservatives number one method of operation? But they don't do it on purpose of course. Now what value is that listed under? I have never seen a party go so far to the opposite as they guys have done. And girls. Palin is a girl after all. Oh what a wicked web we weave when first we practice to deceive. And besides that God is watching! Thankfully! You do reap what you sow! I can see it now reaping and weep!
"When did telling lies become the conservatives number one method of operation?"
When George W. Shrub was elected!
What utter tripe. More liberal dribble like the left are virgins to these publicity stunts. Oh yea!
It seems to me that every time a conservative gets caught red-handed, they start to say how the liberals do the exact same thing. Conservative are obstructionists in congress, and then you hear "well.. both parties ar to blame", Conservative ran up the deficit under Bush..."well both parties are to blame", conservatives started two wars.."well both parties are to blame", we had an economic meltdown under Bush..."well both parties are to blame".
I am tired of you all trying to spread the blame for your mistakes. The guy wrote a book about how Liberals lie, and he himself lied on the jacket. Now we hear from conservatives about how liberals lie too. Conservatives like to talk about taking responsibility for your actions. Well if you talk the talk, then walk the walk.
1)"well..both parties are to blame..(for running up the debt)"; 2) "Conservative are obstructionists in congress...(sic)"; 3) "Well if you talk the talk, then walk the walk."
What Renee says is true:
1) Liberal Dems and RINOs together ran up the debt, alright. At least until the 2010 elections, when repubs won in a landslide, gaining more seats in Congress than in any other election over the previous 100 years. But the debt keeps piling up. obama and the dems have racked up over $5 trillion in new debt in just 3 years.
2) Repubs, Tea Party repubs elected in 2010 in particular, are doing exactly what their constituents sent them to Congress to do: obstruct obama's deficit spending policies that are driving the US over the fiscal cliff. Trouble is the repubs can't even slow down obama's spiraling debt because of Harry Reid using a congressional accounting trick - - for 3 years now Harry Reid refuses to allow the dem-controlled Senate to even submit a budget, and without a budget passing both houses of Congress, the country automatically operates on the last-passed budget, which was the '09 budget that contains obama's $trillion pork-barrel "stimulus," so that Porkulus remains on autopilot, driving us another $trillion/year deeper in debt, and repubs can't stop that spiraling debt as long as Harry Reid and the lib dems hold the Senate.
3) Just like 2) above, repubs, Tea Party repubs in particular, are walking the talk: they are doing what they said they would do when they were campaigning in 2010.... they are doing everything in their power to stop obama and the dems from bankrupting the United States, and that is exactly what their contituents elected them to do.
Typical conservative. Lie like hell all week and then go to church on Sunday and pray for forgiveness. Just like it never happened! What a racket.
A conservative lied?! I can't believe it!
He's calling liberals liars??? The joke's on him. Mr. Goldberg is nothing more than a a hypocrite.
Ironically, Joseph Goebbels would be proud.
He'll "have someone check it out"? He's writing books to draw attention to how liberal politicians exaggerate, when his own jacket blurb is falsified??? Ugh.
This is a great article. I wish MSNBC would apply this same incisiveness in reporting on China. Its China reporters, culturally Chinese or Chinese nationals, whitewash many of the cold hard truths and inevitably make even the most pernicious stories have happy, "harmonized" endings. Insecure propaganda.
No Peg this isn't a surprise. The right wing is totally made up of lies of one kind or another. From Rush Limbaugh telling only part of the story to Mitt Romney saying he worked to save the auto industry among other things.
Is anyone capable of telling the truth anymore?
Sissela Bok writes in Lying: Moral Choice in Public and Private Life:
I once read about the dynamic of lies and the consequences. This article will have to suffice as I can't find the other. I feel society is breaking down. When I see wealthy people and corporations walking away from devastating events with little or no consequences I wonder about the rule book. Tell me the rules...the new rules... so we can all play by them.
An old hermit walked around the village and the area day and night, and even in daylight still carried a lit lantern. One day the villagers had enough curiosity to ask him "Sir, why do you carry your lantern lit in daylight?" He said, "Because I'm searching for an honest man."
Attributed to Diogenes of Sinope - a major contributor to the Cynic school of philosophy
A conservative lying?? I'm shocked!! Why we all know Limbaugh the junkie, Hannity, all the clowns at Fox and all the right wing radio people NEVER lie about ANYTHING.
Amazing. A Jewish Neo-Fascist liar. Ah, you say: "He's a Republican. What else do you expect?" If there were awards for which Jewish writer would have defended Adolph Hitler's policies, Jonah Goldberg would be right at the top. At least he would have been a nominee.
"How Liberals Cheat in the War of Ideas,"
Conservatives do so by padding their resumes, I suppose.
Yeah..., he may as well claimed Native American status in order to gain an edge in his career...
[And he added, "I never put it in the bio in the first place."]
Do right-wingers EVER accept responsibility for ANYTHING? Of course not.
HIS book, HIS bio - it's someone ELSE'S fault.
The standard nondenial denial, the favored copout of the right since tricky dick. And I would like any reactionary posting here to give ONE example of ANY rightwinger taking responsibility for misrepresenting or lying about factual information, just ONE example, to show that the reactionary right CAN take personal and moral responsibility and thus outshine the left.
Of course, it will NEVER happen, because the infallable can NEVER admit weakness.
Just another lying right-wing jerk. The GOP is full of them. They don't let the facts get in the way and the ends justify the means. A pathetic group.
Regardless of how it is presented on the Republican platform as being a cornerstone of conservative dogma , " Personal Responsibility" is an oxymoron.
The true test is a simple one: be wary of what anyone SAYS ; score them by what they DO.
Teatards lie?!?!?! Wow!!! What a revelation!!!
(Next MSNBC will be shocking the world with news that the Pope is Catholic........)
@Bill Dedman Teatards is accetable but moron is not!!!!! My faith is your fairness is shattered!!!!!!!
Oh wait its acceptable!! I forgot to edit!!! LOL
Teatards is a general characterization, moron is a personal attack.
I'm thinking that Mick may not be thinking. Even his edits miss the mark. Jonah G is a traitor to our people.
Dewdle, Your last line speaks the truth. Toss out every word spoken BY the candidate and every word spoken FOR the candidate. Investigate every source for factual actions by this candidate as far back(in his lifetime) as you are able. A man's actions speak the truth about the man. Opinions and projections about the man are useless. Forgiveness for a past mistake can only be based on past history of his actions(not excuses) to correct that mistake.
That's how we used to elect leaders of men. For the last 3 or 4 decades we have become partisan "team" members that knowingly use and spread every exaggerated or downright lie to support our "team". Conservatives hate liberals and liberals hate conservatives despite the fact that the majority of us harbor some conservative and some liberal views. We are rewarded by our own actions with a government so divided that it is unable to effectively govern at all. That explains the current crisis in America more than anything else.
We can continue on our current path and destroy the greatest nation on Earth or learn from our mistakes to return it to it's former glory. Someone once said that we have the government we deserve. I can not find fault with that premise. Our wise founding father's gave us the means to reform and change our government to reflect and fill the needs of the future while remaining a free and self-governing people. We, the people, are directly responsible for bringing this mighty nation to her knees. Not the Congress, the United States Supreme Court or the President. They are only there because we put them there. The change we so desperately need can only come from ourselves.
Putting the CON in CONservative
In other news: his bio also has been scrubble of his claim to a Metal of Honor from WWII.
just another right wing blowhard with no life trying to pump an already inflated ego.
And whip up the lunatic fringe.