IBJNews

IBJ wins national journalism awards

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

IBJ received three national journalism awards at the Society of American Business Editors and Writers’ annual conference on March 20 in Phoenix.

SABEW, a not-for-profit based at Arizona State University, launched the contest in 1995 to set standards for business journalism and recognize role models. Judges included faculty as well as professional writers and editors.

Winners were selected from 783 entries in 58 categories.

IBJ.com was one of three small Web sites honored for general excellence. Judges praised the site, which was redesigned in September, saying it “provides an accessible, innovative and sometimes surprising look into Indianapolis business with coverage that expands well beyond [IBJ's] print edition.”

Reporter Cory Schouten won in the enterprise category for his April package of stories on the Simon family’s influence in Indianapolis. A judge wrote: “In highly readable fashion, Schouten provides a detailed cost-benefit analysis that is at once revelatory and unfailingly fair.”

Managing Editor Greg Andrews was honored in the project category for his October story that uncovered trouble brewing at beleaguered businessman Tim Durham’s Fair Finance Co., now the subject of a federal probe. Judges called the piece “classic, bread-and-butter business journalism that had real impact.”

SABEW board members who convened in Phoenix for the conference voted to hold the 2012 event in Indianapolis.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • congrats
    Congratulations, Cory. The award is recognition of what your readers already know: you're a really good reporter.
  • congratulations
    Very well deserved. It is a shame more media does not do hard news, I think people appreciate it.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. John, unfortunately CTRWD wants to put the tank(s) right next to a nature preserve and at the southern entrance to Carmel off of Keystone. Not exactly the kind of message you want to send to residents and visitors (come see our tanks as you enter our city and we build stuff in nature preserves...

  2. 85 feet for an ambitious project? I could shoot ej*culate farther than that.

  3. I tried, can't take it anymore. Untill Katz is replaced I can't listen anymore.

  4. Perhaps, but they've had a very active program to reduce rainwater/sump pump inflows for a number of years. But you are correct that controlling these peak flows will require spending more money - surge tanks, lines or removing storm water inflow at the source.

  5. All sewage goes to the Carmel treatment plant on the White River at 96th St. Rainfall should not affect sewage flows, but somehow it does - and the increased rate is more than the plant can handle a few times each year. One big source is typically homeowners who have their sump pumps connect into the sanitary sewer line rather than to the storm sewer line or yard. So we (Carmel and Clay Twp) need someway to hold the excess flow for a few days until the plant can process this material. Carmel wants the surge tank located at the treatment plant but than means an expensive underground line has to be installed through residential areas while CTRWD wants the surge tank located further 'upstream' from the treatment plant which costs less. Either solution works from an environmental control perspective. The less expensive solution means some people would likely have an unsightly tank near them. Carmel wants the more expensive solution - surprise!

ADVERTISEMENT