Five Hundred

I'll be the first to admit that greatness is not merely a matter of output, of sheer numbers.  Surely there have been prolific writers and voluminous publishers who have never been nominated for journalism's highest prizes.  So, I don't mean to say that this post—number 500—qualifies Rural Ways for the Pulitzer.  But, it is a fitting time—a rare milestone—to reflect on the quality of this newspaper. 

While the nomination of Rural Ways has not yet been submitted to the prize board, we feel that it is worth reviewing some of the standards set by Joseph Pulitzer.  To start with a couple of technical details, the Pulitzer committee will only consider newspapers that publish at least weekly and that adhere to "the highest journalistic principles."  Check and check.  Beyond that, the committee is looking for "original reporting, good writing, and visual storytelling."  Bingo.  Bingo.  Bingo.  I mean, talk about original:  This newspaper was the first to break the story of can trash in the Parowan Valley.  A story, I might add, that less courageous reporters have yet to take up.  As for good writing, there has been all that stuff about pine trees with Latin names and junk that should leave no doubt about the care and precision with which editors attack pieces filled with flabby useless details that make for long boring and incoherent stories about stuff that nobody would want to read about or anything.  Finally, the visual storytelling at Rural Ways is unmatched anywhere:  Where else can you go to find unique, hard-hitting images of fields and forests, but especially forests?  The visual story told by this post alone should be enough to put us on the short list.

All that being said, and in the interests of journalistic integrity, I should probably point out that the prize is not a sure thing.  Perhaps the biggest question mark involves the issue of how the jury views organizations with a small circulation.  While the number of early subscribers to Rural Ways quickly doubled, and then doubled again, to a confirmed audience of four, the numbers have subsequently tailed off, and the current readership may have fallen back to its core group of one.  As I say, and despite meeting all the other qualifications, it is hard to know what the Pulitzer committee will think of an organization boasting of a readership and a writership composed of the same individual.