April 08, 2008
Now That Cartoonist Michael Ramirez Has Won His Second Pulitzer Prize

Maybe editorial page editors Mark Trahant and James Vesely will consider running some of his cartoons.  (In recent years, most Pulitzer prizes in journalism have been best viewed as reprimands, since they usually go to journalists who have done shoddy work, or worse.  It is good to see this exception, to see a prize that goes to someone who has been doing good work.)

The Seattle PI and the Seattle Times both have competent editorial cartoonists.  (Though Horsey is often misinformed, and Devericks is not as good as he was a few years ago.)  Neither paper makes good choices when they run syndicated cartoons.  Typically, their syndicated cartoons manage to be both boring and mildly annoying.  (Those in the Seattle Times are more boring; those in the Seattle PI are more annoying.)  Neither paper runs many funny syndicated political cartoons.  In fact, when I went through an entire month's worth of cartoons at both newspapers, I found only one or two syndicated cartoons that were even mildly funny.

I am not sure how Trahant and Vesely choose their syndicated cartoons.  But it is obvious that they need different procedures.  Let me make a small suggestion.  At least once a week, they should look through cartoons from Ramirez, and other cartoonists who do not follow their editorial lines, and run one of those cartoons.

Both Trahant and Vesely have people on their editorial boards who can help them choose good cartoons — though they will have to use those people in an unconventional way.  For example, Trahant should pick out some cartoons and show them to — well, I think I won't name anyone here — and if that person says something nasty and coarse about a cartoon, then Trahant should run that cartoon.   Similarly, Vesely should show his cartoon picks to — and again, I think I will skip the name(s) here — and if that person throws a hissy fit over a cartoon, Vesely should run that cartoon.

By adding some funny (and controversial) cartoons to their mix, the two newspapers might gain a little circulation, or, to be more practical, at least reduce their losses in circulation.

(You can see Ramirez's recent cartoons here.  I am especially fond of his March 24th Obama cartoon, as I have said before.)

Posted by Jim Miller at April 08, 2008 09:19 AM | Email This
Comments
1. Nice to see Ramirez getting rewarded. He and Chuck Asay are a couple of the best.

Posted by: RBW on April 8, 2008 10:08 AM
2. Hmmm, Ramirez seems to get what many here do not.

Posted by: Religious Roots on April 8, 2008 10:16 AM
3. The left can only ignore some things for so long. For example, Hollywood keeps making anti-US war movies that don't sell. After a while, that hits them in the pocket book hard enough, and they admit defeat.

Ramirez is great, because he presents things in such a way that they cannot be denied. My favorite is the firefighters holding the social security net. The left like to pretend that we can continue to fund their massive Ponzi schemes, but reality says different.

Posted by: Jeff B. on April 8, 2008 11:31 AM
4. Editors of newspapers like the Times are too stupid to realize that with balanced news reporting and editorials offering differing opinions, they would increase their circulation significantly. They would rather act perplexed and lay off another 200 people, as the Times announced they were doing today.

Posted by: Saltherring on April 8, 2008 12:49 PM
5. Do editorial cartoonists plagiarize each other for ideas?

Horsey had a similar cartoon to this one a co-worker of mine had pinned up that had Uncle Sam shooting oil into his veins back in 2000/01 sometime.

This one in 2008 looks very similar to this one by Horsey in 2006.

Posted by: Cato on April 8, 2008 01:17 PM
6. I think sometimes they come up with obvious ideas independent of each other. That Remiriz cartoon of the Hillary sniper rifle turned back on itself was identical to another cartoon I read on the same day. Both drew essentially the same rifle.

Posted by: RBW on April 8, 2008 01:24 PM
7. Ramirez made a stupid cartoon with oil in a syringe titled "Addiction"? How can the world be "addicted" to a vital natural resource for industry? It's a very moronic meme. It's like saying we're "addicted" to iron ore for steel.

Posted by: FreedomLover on April 8, 2008 03:00 PM
8. You're concerned about one cartoon? You'll never agree with every one. Back when they were debating whether airline pilots should be armed he drew one with a pilot leaning back out of the cockpit door with a smoking pistol and a big chunk of fuselage blown away. A guy sitting in the next row was saying "nice shot". It just fueled the false fear of shooting in a pressuized aircraft but it was at least funny. I didn't like that one either but I usually like Ramirez.

Posted by: RBW on April 8, 2008 04:01 PM
9. CATO.... so that thing your typing on is made from what? O-my "OIL"

Yeah, sure Dick C shot up one very imporant paper. yet the S/C has been doing that for years, but getting back to Dick. If he and GW had really done that you dem's have said, then you guys would have impeached both of them, but guess what... NOTHING.

And why, YA got nothing!

Zip-zero-Nada!

Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on April 8, 2008 04:16 PM
10. Four years ago on the P-I forum I posted links showing that Horsey and his droppings were a straight steal from other and better cartoonists. Result? I got bounced from the forum.

Ramirez is pure genius, the best and brightest since MacNelly. No wonder the LA Times cut him loose. No wonder "news"papers are flatlining.

Posted by: 'Toon Swoon on April 8, 2008 05:00 PM
11. David Horsey had a wonderful effort in the P-I today... Gen. Petaeus pointing and a black screen and saying that you could see the light at the end of the tunnel. This is the classic lefty mix: slip in an allusion to Viet Nam, the crowning glory of leftist achievement in US defeat and only a few million asian deaths, and then make reference to the fact that the success that the General predicted 6 months ago has completely failed to... oh, wait...

well, they can always hope for more US deaths, while they of course support the troops.

Posted by: sherlock on April 9, 2008 06:31 PM