<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<title>Judges&apos; Blog</title>
<link rel="alternate" type="application/xhtml+xml" href="http://views.washingtonpost.com/pundit-judges/"/>
<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://views.washingtonpost.com/pundit-judges/atom.xml"/>
<updated>2010-11-02T18:38:28Z</updated>
<subtitle>Post Pundit Judges&apos; Blog</subtitle>
<id>tag:views.washingtonpost.com,2010:/pundit-judges/103</id>
<rights>Copyright (c) 2010, WashingtonPost.Newsweek Interactive</rights>

<entry>
<title>Conor Williams wins the title</title>
<link rel="alternate"  type="text/html" href="http://views.washingtonpost.com/pundit-judges/2010/11/conor_williams_wins_angp_2010.html" />
<updated>2010-11-02T18:38:28Z</updated>
<id>tag:washingtonpost.com,2010-11-02:/pundit-judges2010/11/conor_williams_wins_angp_2010.html</id>
<summary type="text"><![CDATA[The results are in. Conor Willliams wins the title of&nbsp;America's Next Great Pundit 2010, and along with it a&nbsp;three-month contract with The Post&nbsp;and a launching pad into the world of punditry. Conor received 1,559 votes in the final round of voting. Runners-up Nancy Goldstein and Lauren Hogan received 1,167 and 707, respectively. Conor, a PhD student at Georgetown and a "proud product of Kalamazoo," was a reader favorite from the start. He was the only]]>...Please click on the title to continue reading this entry.</summary>
<author>
<name>Marisa Katz</name>
</author>

</entry>

<entry>
<title>This week&apos;s vote results</title>
<link rel="alternate"  type="text/html" href="http://views.washingtonpost.com/pundit-judges/2010/10/the_semifinal-round_vote_results.html" />
<updated>2010-10-28T23:40:20Z</updated>
<id>tag:washingtonpost.com,2010-10-28:/pundit-judges2010/10/the_semifinal-round_vote_results.html</id>
<summary type="text">The results are in. After watching our final four in a video round-table debate and a live online discussion, readers voted for Ted Reinstein to be eliminated from the contest. Reinstein was a reader favorite in the previous two rounds of voting. And since by day he&apos;s a television reporter, the video challenge should have played to some of his strengths. As part of the video critique, judge Jonathan Capehart complimented Reinstein for being &quot;so...Please click on the title to continue reading this entry.</summary>
<author>
<name>Marisa Katz</name>
</author>
<category term="Critique of the video challenge" />
</entry>

<entry>
<title>Capehart&apos;s critique of the video challenge</title>
<link rel="alternate"  type="text/html" href="http://views.washingtonpost.com/pundit-judges/2010/10/capeharts_critique_of_the_video_challenge.html" />
<updated>2010-10-27T23:10:35Z</updated>
<id>tag:washingtonpost.com,2010-10-27:/pundit-judges2010/10/capeharts_critique_of_the_video_challenge.html</id>
<summary type="text"><![CDATA[Post editorial writer and TV personality Jonathan Capehart gave the final four pundit contestants some tough love after their video challenge. Watch his critique below. And when you're ready, cast your vote for which contestant should NOT advance to the&nbsp;finals. Polls are open 8 a.m. through 5 p.m. ET. For a larger version of the video, click here.]]>...Please click on the title to continue reading this entry.</summary>
<author>
<name>Marisa Katz</name>
</author>
<category term="Judge Jonathan Capehart" />
</entry>

<entry>
<title>It comes down to heroes</title>
<link rel="alternate"  type="text/html" href="http://views.washingtonpost.com/pundit-judges/2010/10/it_comes_down_to_heroes.html" />
<updated>2010-10-26T16:01:56Z</updated>
<id>tag:washingtonpost.com,2010-10-26:/pundit-judges2010/10/it_comes_down_to_heroes.html</id>
<summary type="text"><![CDATA[Thoughts from Post columnist Dana Milbank on the Q&amp;A challenge: Let's do this by process of elimination. First one out: Nancy.&nbsp;Asked to name a main competitor, three contestants praised Nancy, and she answered: "Sorry, but I really just don't think about it that way."&nbsp;Also, she praised a New York Times columnist, Krugman, twice. Next out: Lauren.&nbsp;She praised another New York Times columnist, Brooks. Then I'm afraid Conor must be eliminated for answering back-to-back questions with]]>...Please click on the title to continue reading this entry.</summary>
<author>
<name>Dana Milbank</name>
</author>
<category term="Critique of the Q&amp;A challenge" />
</entry>

<entry>
<title>Why so unwilling to take a stand?</title>
<link rel="alternate"  type="text/html" href="http://views.washingtonpost.com/pundit-judges/2010/10/why_so_unwilling_to_take_a_stand.html" />
<updated>2010-10-25T20:41:31Z</updated>
<id>tag:washingtonpost.com,2010-10-25:/pundit-judges2010/10/why_so_unwilling_to_take_a_stand.html</id>
<summary type="text"><![CDATA[Thoughts from Post Editorial Page Editor Fred Hiatt on the Q&amp;A challenge: I'm afraid this Q&amp;A&nbsp;read more like a politicians' forum than a pundit free-for-all, with the main object being not to offend any voters (while rallying that Kalamazoo electorate!). Okay, I know it is hard to do these live discussions. When you're put on the spot like this, your first goal inevitably will be to not write anything really dumb or offensive. And all]]>...Please click on the title to continue reading this entry.</summary>
<author>
<name>Fred Hiatt</name>
</author>
<category term="Critique of the Q&amp;A challenge" />
</entry>

<entry>
<title>Where&apos;s the personality?</title>
<link rel="alternate"  type="text/html" href="http://views.washingtonpost.com/pundit-judges/2010/10/wheres_the_personality.html" />
<updated>2010-10-25T20:15:03Z</updated>
<id>tag:washingtonpost.com,2010-10-25:/pundit-judges2010/10/wheres_the_personality.html</id>
<summary type="text"><![CDATA[Thoughts from Post columnist and Chatological Humor host Gene Weingarten on the Face the Audience challenge,&nbsp;in which&nbsp;the finalists had to field questions from readers: Here is my reaction to the online chat, with one caveat: I have only read this last round.&nbsp;I have not read the previous rounds, during which it is entirely possible that one or more of these contestants proved him or herself to have some personality, brio, edge, energy, courage or sense]]>...Please click on the title to continue reading this entry.</summary>
<author>
<name>Gene Weingarten</name>
</author>
<category term="Critique of the Q&amp;A challenge" />
</entry>

<entry>
<title>The blogging round results</title>
<link rel="alternate"  type="text/html" href="http://views.washingtonpost.com/pundit-judges/2010/10/results_for_the_blogging_round_vote.html" />
<updated>2010-10-23T00:54:01Z</updated>
<id>tag:washingtonpost.com,2010-10-22:/pundit-judges2010/10/results_for_the_blogging_round_vote.html</id>
<summary type="text">The results are in. Readers voted for Conor Williams, Lauren Hogan and Ted Reinstein to move on to the next round. Conor, Lauren and Ted will be joining blogging round winner Nancy Goldstein for a live discussion with readers at noon on Monday. And we hope you&apos;ll send some good questions their way. (You can submit questions before or during the discussion.) Also based on reader votes, we have to say goodbye to Amina Luqman,...Please click on the title to continue reading this entry.</summary>
<author>
<name>Marisa Katz</name>
</author>
<category term="Critique of the blogging challenge" />
</entry>

<entry>
<title>Nancy wins the round, and some final thoughts</title>
<link rel="alternate"  type="text/html" href="http://views.washingtonpost.com/pundit-judges/2010/10/nancy_wins_the_round_and_some_final_thoughts.html" />
<updated>2010-10-22T12:30:47Z</updated>
<id>tag:washingtonpost.com,2010-10-22:/pundit-judges2010/10/nancy_wins_the_round_and_some_final_thoughts.html</id>
<summary type="text">First, I should say I was very impressed by the quality of the writing from the contenders, the top fraction of a percent of those who applied to the contest. Some I am sure will go on to win other rounds of America&apos;s Next Great Pundit Contest, and should, based on their facility with the column form and assured prose. But for the blogging round, it&apos;s Nancy Goldstein. My criteria in making the pick: whose...Please click on the title to continue reading this entry.</summary>
<author>
<name>Garance Franke-Ruta</name>
</author>
<category term="2010 entries" />
</entry>

<entry>
<title>Strong finish to the blogging challenge</title>
<link rel="alternate"  type="text/html" href="http://views.washingtonpost.com/pundit-judges/2010/10/strong_finish.html" />
<updated>2010-10-22T11:35:14Z</updated>
<id>tag:washingtonpost.com,2010-10-22:/pundit-judges2010/10/strong_finish.html</id>
<summary type="text"><![CDATA[Final thoughts: &nbsp; First, the blogging week is hard -- the hardest week of the contest for me. Congrats to the contestants on surviving! &nbsp; Second, putting yourself out in public can be brutal. It's a new experience for most contestants, and it feels personal when&nbsp;judges and commenters&nbsp;rip into your work. People forget you aren't a public figure -- you're doing this on top of your regular life. While I empathize, here's my advice: Thicken]]>...Please click on the title to continue reading this entry.</summary>
<author>
<name>Kevin Huffman</name>
</author>
<category term="Judge Kevin Huffman" />
</entry>

<entry>
<title>Nancy Goldstein wins the challenge</title>
<link rel="alternate"  type="text/html" href="http://views.washingtonpost.com/pundit-judges/2010/10/why_nancy.html" />
<updated>2010-10-22T11:31:58Z</updated>
<id>tag:washingtonpost.com,2010-10-21:/pundit-judges2010/10/why_nancy.html</id>
<summary type="text"><![CDATA[It wasn't easy. But for me the person most likely to write a blog I'll want to read is Nancy Goldstein. She will clearly throw a lot of punches. And she will willingly mix it up with others. She'll tell me about stuff I don't know about -- and will&nbsp;hector me into understanding&nbsp;why I &lt;i&gt;should&lt;/i&gt; know about it. Goldstein made me want&nbsp;to know more about what will happen when whoever controls Congress next year&nbsp;finds the&nbsp;Blackwater&nbsp;mess]]>...Please click on the title to continue reading this entry.</summary>
<author>
<name>Greg Sargent</name>
</author>
<category term="Judge Greg Sargent" />
</entry>

<entry>
<title>Focus on features</title>
<link rel="alternate"  type="text/html" href="http://views.washingtonpost.com/pundit-judges/2010/10/focus_on_features.html" />
<updated>2010-10-21T15:19:04Z</updated>
<id>tag:washingtonpost.com,2010-10-21:/pundit-judges2010/10/focus_on_features.html</id>
<summary type="text">I was a little disappointed that in the recurring feature challenge no one suggested anything visual or that involves Web video. Items with art get better click-through and also encourage readers to spend more time on any given page, and in general video and photo offerings are as important a part of any given blog as links. To the challenge, then. I&apos;ve divided my reactions to the proposals into categories: Yes. Nancy Goldstein, &quot;Oy Vey...Please click on the title to continue reading this entry.</summary>
<author>
<name>Garance Franke-Ruta</name>
</author>
<category term="Judge Garance Franke-Ruta" />
</entry>

<entry>
<title>Some are starting to pull away</title>
<link rel="alternate"  type="text/html" href="http://views.washingtonpost.com/pundit-judges/2010/10/some_are_starting_to_pull_away.html" />
<updated>2010-10-21T12:38:04Z</updated>
<id>tag:washingtonpost.com,2010-10-21:/pundit-judges2010/10/some_are_starting_to_pull_away.html</id>
<summary type="text">Some of the contestants are hitting their stride and finding their voice. I&apos;m not a huge fan of the &quot;regular feature&quot; device, since I think it&apos;s brutally hard to come up with a permanent hook with no advance notice. The Wednesday morning blogs were a little stilted, but I cut the contestants some slack there. It was a warm-up for the afternoon posts, which I thought had some standouts and some writers who are finding...Please click on the title to continue reading this entry.</summary>
<author>
<name>Kevin Huffman</name>
</author>
<category term="Critique of the blogging challenge" />
</entry>

<entry>
<title>Your blog needs an identity</title>
<link rel="alternate"  type="text/html" href="http://views.washingtonpost.com/pundit-judges/2010/10/your_blog_needs_an_identity.html" />
<updated>2010-10-21T00:58:16Z</updated>
<id>tag:washingtonpost.com,2010-10-20:/pundit-judges2010/10/your_blog_needs_an_identity.html</id>
<summary type="text">When people come to your blog, they need to have a clear sense of exactly what they&apos;re going to get when they arrive. Your blog needs an identity. People need to have an instinctual grasp of what it&apos;s about. A sense of whether you&apos;re doing original reporting, or aggregating of stuff that others have overlooked, or your own special mix of the two. A general feeling that the tone and point of view and subject...Please click on the title to continue reading this entry.</summary>
<author>
<name>Greg Sargent</name>
</author>
<category term="Critique of the blogging challenge" />
</entry>

<entry>
<title>Blogging about blogging</title>
<link rel="alternate"  type="text/html" href="http://views.washingtonpost.com/pundit-judges/2010/10/blogging_about_blogging.html" />
<updated>2010-10-20T16:13:16Z</updated>
<id>tag:washingtonpost.com,2010-10-20:/pundit-judges2010/10/blogging_about_blogging.html</id>
<summary type="text">What a lot of copy! The first thing to know about blogging in the era of the social link is that your copy will be competing in a heavily stocked marketplace of ideas where it is likely initially to be heavily link dependent and reliant on a handful of portals to reach readers, unless you have an existing social media or other following. That means the writing, reporting and thinking has to stand out and...Please click on the title to continue reading this entry.</summary>
<author>
<name>Garance Franke-Ruta</name>
</author>
<category term="Judge Garance Franke-Ruta" />
</entry>

<entry>
<title>Tuesday - better, but still not there</title>
<link rel="alternate"  type="text/html" href="http://views.washingtonpost.com/pundit-judges/2010/10/tuesday_-_better_but_still_not_there.html" />
<updated>2010-10-20T04:36:00Z</updated>
<id>tag:washingtonpost.com,2010-10-19:/pundit-judges2010/10/tuesday_-_better_but_still_not_there.html</id>
<summary type="text"><![CDATA[The Delaware debate blogs were better than yesterday's blogs, maybe because everyone was forced into a narrow topic. By the end of reading the entries, I felt for the contestants, starting their day watching this monstrosity. It sounded painful. &nbsp; Two entries stood out to me: &nbsp; Conor Williams's entry was short, punchy and made me laugh. The laugh line was provocative too -- what have we come to as a country when our candidates]]>...Please click on the title to continue reading this entry.</summary>
<author>
<name>Kevin Huffman</name>
</author>
<category term="Judge Kevin Huffman" />
</entry>

</feed>  
