As I’ve written about previously, society treats athletes that have never won a championship poorly, as if they are less than worthy of basic human decency. My recent article took that misguided line of thinking to an extreme in the context of sports journalism. However, now it’s time to take that obviously terrible line of thinking and extrapolate it out to other lines of work that impact society. While the arguments I’ll present in this article will undoubtedly sharpen some pitchforks, the point of this article is to illustrate how laughably absurd or downright blasphemous this line of thinking truly is. To put an important parameter around this thought experiment; no amount of net worth, income, or lesser prestigious prizes will shield the non-recipients from scorn. After all, nobody brings up the fact that Charles Barkley won an Olympic gold medal, made millions of dollars and was voted to numerous All-Star games, he is only remembered for his failure in winning a championship.
For now, we’ll stay in the world of entertainment (that’s what sports are after all, entertainment, albeit unscripted). Every January, we love to huddle in front of the TV and tune into the Oscar’s; the award ceremony in which Hollywood crown’s it’s top achievements of the preceding year. However, every year there are snubs, or deserving actors that did not receive an Oscar. The incomparable Samuel L. Jackson has never won an Oscar in his incredible career, yet Casey Affleck won the gold in 2017. While I have nothing against the younger Affleck brother, the sports world would tell Samuel L. Jackson to sit down and take notes when Casey Affleck is talking, for Jackson might just learn something; are you laughing yet? Jackson’s films and one-liners (even the ones that lack the term motherfucker) have been some of the most iconic in Hollywood history, while Casey Affleck’s career has been far less impressive. The world of music is just as ludicrous with their award designations as well; Bob Marley, who my grade school music teacher would lecture us on, never won a Grammy, yet Milli Vanilli has won the acclaimed prize. Our modern sports discourse would lead us to believe that only culture that has won the most sought-after awards are worth consuming. Apparently, that must mean SLJ and Bob Marley need to step aside to make room for Casey Affleck and Milli Vanilli…
“Well Dan, that’s only in the world of entertainment, give us something a little more impactful!” an impatient reader will whine. Fine, we can move to the world of journalism. Michael Yon is a former special forces operator who then turned his civilian life towards being a war correspondent. Yon was not content to be a studio pundit (eww…pundits), opting instead to don a flak vest, and head onto the scene in Iraq and Afghanistan in the 2000’s, Hong Kong in 2019, and many other combat zones in between. Yon’s willingness to risk his life in order to present the news is commendable, yet he has never won a Pulitzer Prize for his journalism. Yet, if the 75-IQ sports community had their way, we would call this brave journalist a scrub because he has yet to win a Pulitzer. I’m sorry, but I don’t subscribe to that clearly broken line of thinking.
Journalism isn’t the only realm that awards Pulitzer Prizes; they are given to nonfiction authors as well. Ryan Holiday is one author that has sold millions of copies of his books, has appeared on numerous best-seller lists, and has single-handedly revived an entire generation’s interest in Stoicism (and one could argue, in philosophy as a whole). Yet his works have never won a Pulitzer, despite his work intertwining biography and history. Walter Issacson has never won a Pulitzer either, despite writing some of the most iconic biographies on trailblazers such as Steve Jobs, Henry Kissinger, Benjamin Franklin, Elon Musk, Da Vinci and Einstein. In short, Walter Issacson is the LeBron James of writing biographies. But hey, I guess that hacks such as Holiday and Issacson need to stop polluting the airways until they win a Pulitzer, amirite? No, wrong! If we stocked only Pulitzer winning authors in our nation’s libraries and bookstores, the shelves would be a lot more barren.
Let’s take a quick lunch break! In fact, I know this great Thai restaurant down the street from my apartment. They are known throughout the state of New Hampshire for their great food, despite the odd façade (the restaurant is colored neon orange!). The walls of the interior are covered with numerous Yelp (and similar) reviews despite the establishment being less than a decade old. The owner is a friendly older Thai man who never fails to light up a room; he’ll even occasionally throw in a free side of crispy rolls! However, he lacks the all-important Michelin Star, so apparently that means his eatery isn’t worth visiting? Nonsense. Ditto for my favorite donut shop, equidistant from my home, that routinely wins community-based awards for Best Donuts in the State. But they have no Michelin Stars, so that means they aren’t worth patronage (according to toxic sports fans). If we were to close down all restaurants in the nation except for those that are Michelin ranked, then we would have a tiny fraction of culinary choices. Given that we are one of the fattest nations on earth, I doubt anyone will seriously spout this nonsense.
Science is a topic that is near and dear to my heart. Like many Millennials, I was shown countless hours of Bill Nye the Science Guy as a starry-eyed youth. Bill Nye served as a beacon of attention to the scientific community and has tirelessly advocated for expansion of scientific funding, scientific literacy and science enthusiasm over the decades (he even debated a creationist!). Neil DeGrasse Tyson boasts an even more impressive resume than that of Nye. However, both of them lack a Nobel Prize, so the broken logic would have us believe that these two pioneers are not worth listening to. If we limited scientific discourse to only those who have won a Nobel Prize in their field, we would be silencing large swaths of the scientific community, which is a horrible idea. There would be virtually nobody left to teach the next generation of scientists and engineers in our schools and universities, not to mention nobody to, you know, conduct scientific research. Considering that nobody from Pfizer or Moderna won the prize for saving mankind from COVID-19, suffice it to say that most Ph.D.’s don’t stand a snowball’s chance in hell of ever winning the prize (and apparently, having a valid opinion on science).
I could go on, but I believe that the point has been made by now. Also, this 75-IQ line of thinking introduces a problem that many of its practitioners don’t realize; it institutes a gate-keeping system that is often more harmful than helpful. If this line of thinking were to metastasize in the ways I just described, then how would new works of art be made? Seemingly, new films and music would be submitted directly to the governing bodies (read: unions) that dole out these prizes, with only the winners being then released to the public? Assuming no corruption (though Denzel has debunked that years ago) then the public would get a fraction of the content we do now, dictated to us by a shadowy group of taste arbiters (what are they, bookstore employees?). If that seems dystopic, that’s because it is. How would new restaurants open? Imagine if new restaurants had to win an award from a goddamned tire company prior to being able to serve customers? That would be insane and quite literally be the death of the restaurant industry. Restricting tv airtime to journalists that have a Pulitzer Prize would significantly reduce the availability of news, and I can’t afford to lose my canaries. Lastly, closing off the availability of science to only those with a Nobel Prize limits the peer-review process, which is pretty fucking important.
Sometimes bad logic needs to be publicly made fun of.
Home Page 