3 Valley Independent staffers win state awards
Trib Total Media won 13 Golden Quills for journalistic excellence at The Press Club of Western Pennsylvania's 49th annual Golden Quills Awards Banquet Monday night at the Sheraton Station Square.
The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review won seven Golden Quills in the competition among daily newspapers and wire services with a circulation over 45,000.
Jeremy Sellew, a staff writer at The Valley Independent was a finalist in the sports article or series category for daily newspapers and wire services, circulation under 45,000. Sellew also was a finalist for his column writing.
In other annual contests recognizing journalistic achievement, three Valley Independent staff members were honored in the Pennsylvania Associated Press Managing Editors' 2013 writing and photo contest.
Stacy Wolford, a staff writer, won first place in feature writing for her story “Alex Danko, 9, solves dad's pool problem — right on cue.”
Sellew won second place for his sports/outdoors columns titled “PSU needs to move on from JoePa,” “Role Reversal for Pens, Flyers” and “Legging go is hard to do.”
Staff photographer Jim Ference captured second place for his photo story, “Pioneer Days draws crowd to Perryopolis.”
Ference also received an honorable mention for his photo story, “Pioneer Days draws crowd to Perryopolis,” in the 2013 Professional Keystone Press Awards.
The PAPME and Keystone awards will be presented Friday and Saturday during the annual Pa. Press Conference in Harrisburg.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.