The announcement of the Pulitzer prizes were broadcast live on the organization’s website, and what everyone should be able to agree was the photo of the year was snubbed. That, of course, is the second photo above, shot by Evan Vucci of the Associated Press and generally appreciated as a masterpiece of composition, story-telling and drama. But, of course, the photo is alao widely believed to have helped Donald Trump get elected President, so by definition the photo is bad, and must not be honored. Another photo related to the assassination attempt, the first one above taken by Doug Mills, won the prize instead. After all, that one had the good people thinking ruefully, “Damn. Missed him by that much!”
The snubbed photo will be in history books and regarded as one of the most memorable moments captured on film, along with the GI kissing the nurse in Times Square, Harry Truman holding up the “Dewey Defeats Truman” headline, the naked Vietnamese girl running from a napalm attack, and the Frenchman weeping as Hitler’s army swept down a Paris street. An angry Monica Showalter writes at American Thinker,
The picture turned up on t-shirts, coffee mugs, stickers and posters, signaling how much the public was moved by it….But it was hardly propaganda — it was the work of an experienced photographer able to act with split-second instincts in a dangerous situation with events still unfolding….I have no inside line on why this photo didn’t win the Pulitzer, despite being so deserving of it. Did the AP not promote it, or did the Pulitzer board shun it, on what could only be political grounds? Either way, it’s a disgrace. The photo had Pulitzer written all over it, and the judges could only view the thing through wokester-impaired eyes.
As for me, I an neither disappointed nor surprised, not after this now thoroughly corrupt organization awarded a Pulitzer prize for the racist, fake history lesson of “The 1619 Project.” In truth I am impressed: the deliberate decision to ignore such a deserving photo says to all, “Yes, the Pulitzers are partisan and politically biased. We don’t care. In fact, we’re proud. Suck it!”
Thanks for your candor. We get the message.
Ethics Alarms 
I can see the argument being made that capturing a bullet en route to its intended target is an amazing shot for a photographer to get, but I do agree with you that the now-iconic photo of Trump’s response was the better choice and that there’s no question it was deliberately snubbed.
When I first saw the bullet photo, my first reaction was that it was photoshopped.
When I saw the second photo, my first reaction was “F*** yeah, here it comes!”.
Truth needs no comment.
You are spot on Jack, the same can be said for the Oscars. , the emmys and the Toney.
Allof these awards are disregarding thier original intent and have each and evy one of them becoem propagandist tools for the extremes,
Or, as some say, duly noted. Keep up the bias. Trump apparently destroys people’s brains.
“I Think It’s Admirable That the Pulitzers Are So Transparent About Their Blatant Partisan Bias“
Pulitzer: Hold Our Beer!
WaPo wins Pulitzer in Breaking News category:
Trump Taken Away After LOUD NOISES At Rally
To borrow a phrase: No Matter How Much You Despise These People, It’s Not Enough!
PWS
“I Think It’s Admirable That the Pulitzers Are So Transparent About Their Blatant Partisan Bias“
White House Correspondents Association: Hold Our Beer!
Their Picture Of The Year:
PWS
Not to speak ill of the ill, but that picture looks like he is about to walk into the fireplace.
If they had to choose a pic of SloJo, this one would have been more iconic:
https://a57.foxnews.com/cf-images.us-east-1.prod.boltdns.net/v1/static/694940094001/4bb9d333-f3b5-43da-8099-f58a59eaff80/7cfc2805-032d-468a-962e-8e902e83b780/1280×720/match/720/405/image.jpg?ve=1&tl=1
The “Red Speech” would have been good choice, too.
I looked through that twitter feed. Some goodies that I’d almost forgotten:
CNN: “Secret Service rushes Trump off stage after he falls at rally” and
AP: “BREAKING: Donald Trump has been escorted off the stage by Secret Service during a rally after loud noises ring out in the crowd.”
All three of them used basically the same iconic picture, although with CNN and AP it is harder to tell that his face is bloody.
Not a good look for any of them, to say the least.
Almost every time I have the misfortune of listening to MSNBC, I am struck by the sheer venom of everyone involved. Even if they were saying things I agree with (or, for that matter, just telling the truth) I would not care for that. It is disgusting and corrosive.
The bullet photo is interesting, but it’s creation was 99.99% pure luck. Both photos exist due, in part, to the chance or planning of the photographers being in the right place, but the flag one occurred after the action had started, and relied more on the skill of the photographer to frame and get the shot. It’s also, as nearly everyone notes, a truly iconic photo, and likely to remain so.
Res ipsa loquitur (in the true meaning) on Pulitzer’s motives.
(“its” …the first one. I hate myself when I do that!)
Apparently, the Pulitzer people are also fond of dishonest, virulent, antisemites (learning nothing from their 1619 project selection, I guess).
https://jonathanturley.org/2025/05/08/pulitzer-prize-awarded-to-palestinian-writer-accused-of-false-and-antisemitic-attacks-on-hamas-victims/