MOE contest deadline is Jan. 25

The Mark of Excellence and Sigma Delta Chi awards are open for entries. The MOE Awards honor the best in collegiate journalism, and the entry deadline is Jan. 25, 2012. Entries for SDX Awards, for professional journalists, are due by Feb. 9, 2012.

The awards cover online, print, radio and television journalism. To be eligible, work must have been published or broadcast in 2011. Both contests are open to non-members, although SPJ members receive a discount on the entry fee.

Please visit our awards site for more information, and enter online here.


Please direct questions about the contests to Lauren Rochester by emailing

Email this to someoneTweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Share on FacebookShare on TumblrShare on RedditPin on Pinterest

Defending the First Amendment and promoting open government are more crucial now than ever. Join SPJ's fight for the public’s right to know — either as an SPJ Supporter or a professional, student or retired journalist.

  • durka durka

    yeah why is briana wu who knows nothing of the history of tomb raider talks matter? Most people dont even know that lara’s physique was a accident that had to do with a screw up during 3d modeling, psx limited rendering and too many polygons…all that while running out of time and having to push a character out. The first 3 games have nearly identical graphics so nothing could be done, after that the character was established. By the time the game went to the hd era, half the gameplay was gone but “oh its progressive because lara isnt dressed sexilly anymore and has smaller breasts”

    Half the game is gone, traps gone, medkits gone, ammo scanvanging gone, keys gone, yet another cover based shooter that interupts the gameplay every 4 minutes with a cutscene but “the character is more representitive of women now”

    You know what else is more representitive now? generic dudes with guns, what happen to the dinosaurs and the monsters from the old games?

    I swear the progressive press has no idea what makes games good, which is why they keep shilling their hipster buddies “emotional” walking simulators.

  • Jeremy Fine

    Michael, “we don’t care what you think” has been the common refrain from SPJ since day one, whether it was your button-pushing “updates” or your irritating habit of listening to the loudest people instead of taking a wider view.

    And now, as a response, you’ve created an award that, by design, excludes any material that could actually demonstrate the wild imbalance that actually took place, by demanding that its presence in reality not be demonstrated?

    What a sad day this is. You had the chance to show you had balls, and instead, you retreated back into your hugbox, where you pretend you are capable of that which you have failed to demonstrate chronically:


  • bryoneill11

    If kotaku or Polygon ending up winning some shit, all this was for nothing.

  • chizwoz

    Not necessarily. Not everyone at Polygon and Kotaku are as bad as their worst offenders like Kuchera and Hernandez. Totilo wrote very reasonably about Daniel Vavra’s participation with gamergate and Owen Good at Polygon wrote a very impartial piece on the airplay thingy.
    While I would probably agree that the games industry would be a better place if these 2 sites just went out of business, that’s probably not going to happen. So trying to improve them is more realistic approach.

  • SPJ AirPlay

    I’ll give you “irritating” and even “button-pushing” – I’m self-actualized enough to concede those traits – but how can a contest fail to be objective because it eschews opinion?

  • Vetarnias

    For the news reporting category, I can understand: it’s a fairly traditional way of describing it, but I doubt you will find much of it in the gaming press, which tends towards hype. Brave games journalism is rare (and Kotaku’s maudlin “Ubisoft and Bethesda blacklist us!” doesn’t really count if it’s just a passive-aggressive way to arm-twist them into feeding Kotaku content that it can get page hits from), and what little of it exists should be rewarded, yes. It’s not the place for opinion pieces.

    But for features, though, why not? Why don’t opinion pieces count? Or essays? Or anything that bears a passing resemblance of what goes on in video games writing? If those are out, I’m not even sure what would be left to qualify. It’s even more obvious for the video categories, as all you’ll find there is opinion.

    Surely you don’t buy the GamerGate narrative that there can exist such a thing as an “objective review”? Assuming that you don’t, is this post really saying that the Kunkels – with opinion pieces out of the way – don’t even have an award for game reviewing, when the Pulitzers, just to name those, have prizes for both editorials and criticism? That what is missing from the current state of affairs is precisely recognition for video games reviewing?

    Likewise, does that mean that the entire field of “new games journalism” is disqualified because it values its very subjectivity? Never mind that I’m quite certain that if in 20 years’ time, if not sooner, it will be the only kind of games writing from today that will still be read – and if not that, then nothing.

    Which is how I interpret the Kunkel Awards in the light of this update: it’s all for naught.

    Would you care to point to a piece of writing (ideally one too old to qualify for these awards), that exemplifies what you consider to be an admissible feature?

  • Linny May

    Below is All Journalists review of Every video game – sans opinion:


Twitter Facebook Google Plus RSS Instagram Pinterest Pinterest LinkedIn

© Society of Professional Journalists. All rights reserved. Legal

Society of Professional Journalists
Eugene S. Pulliam National Journalism Center, 3909 N. Meridian St., Indianapolis, IN 46208
317/927-8000 | Fax: 317/920-4789 | Contact SPJ Headquarters | Employment Opportunities | Advertise with SPJ