How decorated of a journalist should Lois be?

[Osiris-Rex]

Maybe I'll start a new thread once I get my ducks in a row and have an hour or whatever to spell out my thoughts. I could call it "How decorated of a journalist should Lois be?" Or you or someone else can get it started and I'll reply when possible. I have a lot of thoughts about it, real and fictional-world related.

Challenge accepted. If the TV version of Kara Danvers can win a Pulitzer then I would think a reporter that has been a reporter for a lot longer like Lois Lane should be able too. There has to have been
a story in Lois's career as important as exposing Lex Luthor's manipulations.

[manwhohaseverything]

Lois can be as decorated as the story teller wants. As long as, the readers get conveyed the feeling that it's earned through actual events in story. Just show us how she got the award, even as a flashback or something.

[seismic-2]

In the same way that Batman is the World's Greatest Detective, Lois is the World's Greatest Investigative Reporter. It's her superpower.

[Jon Clark]

In the same way that Batman is the World's Greatest Detective, Lois is the World's Greatest Investigative Reporter. It's her superpower.

But Lois isn't a superhero, nothing about her should be called a superpower outside of tongue in cheek banter.

[manwhohaseverything]

But Lois isn't a superhero, nothing about her should be called a superpower outside of tongue in cheek banter.

She beat harley quinn in apocalypse war and i loved it.

[Gaius]

I’m fine with Lois eventually becoming a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist but, outside of some retold origins, I’d rather her not quite be at that level when she and Clark first meet.

[seismic-2]

But Lois isn't a superhero, nothing about her should be called a superpower outside of tongue in cheek banter.

Lois is an exceptional woman, which is why Superman is attracted to her. Lana was Clark's girl-next-door, but he considers Lois to be the ideal female (and he is friends with Wonder Woman!). As for her being a "superhero", one reason that Clark felt comfortable about marrying her is his belief that even though she goes on very dangerous assignments, she is capable of taking care of herself when he's not around.

[Jon Clark]

Lois is an exceptional woman, which is why Superman is attracted to her. Lana was Clark's girl-next-door, but he considers Lois to be the ideal female (and he is friends with Wonder Woman!). As for her being a "superhero", one reason that Clark felt comfortable about marrying her is his belief that even though she goes on very dangerous assignments, she is capable of taking care of herself when he's not around.

There is exceptional and then there is ridiculous.

[Jon Clark]

Once again I prefer that Superman's cast not be full of exceptional people. In Lois' case that means she should be a working reporter but not one with any name recognition. Lois shouldn't be listed with Woodward, Bernstein, and Thompson. She doesn't need to be a 2010 Diane Sawyer, Barbara Walters, or Edward R Murrow. Lois is smart, hardworking and dedicated but neither she nor Clark (prior to the ID reveal) should have deductive skills that are on the level of Batman, Vic Sage, or Detective Chimp. Being the main supporting cast member shouldn't make her superhero material. Outside of her reporting on Superman, she should not be any more awarded or noticed than any run of the mill LA or New York reporter.

[Nelliebly]

Once again I prefer that Superman's cast not be full of exceptional people. In Lois' case that means she should be a working reporter but not one with any name recognition. Lois shouldn't be listed with Woodward, Bernstein, and Thompson. She doesn't need to be a 2010 Diane Sawyer, Barbara Walters, or Edward R Murrow. Lois is smart, hardworking and dedicated but neither she nor Clark (prior to the ID reveal) should have deductive skills that are on the level of Batman, Vic Sage, or Detective Chimp. Being the main supporting cast member shouldn't make her superhero material. Outside of her reporting on Superman, she should not be any more awarded or noticed than any run of the mill LA or New York reporter.

Why does Lois, as the female lead of the franchise, have to be kept on a certain “level”? Why is it a problem for Superman if this woman, with zero superpowers, has her own extraordinary achievements? Why is she not allowed to have those things? She has to stay down...for what? So it doesn’t threaten him? Because that’s how this sounds.

[Jon Clark]

Why does Lois, as the female lead of the franchise, have to be kept on a certain “level”? Why is it a problem for Superman if this woman, with zero superpowers, has her own extraordinary achievements? Why is she not allowed to have those things? She has to stay down...for what? So it doesn’t threaten him? Because that’s how this sounds.

It basically sounds like you want her to “know her place” and to stay in her place. God forbid she be too successful. It sounds a heck of a lot like the kind of stuff real female reporters are told all the time to keep them down and from usurping men.

One, she is not the female lead of the franchise. She is a supporting character. The same as Jimmy, Perry, Martha, and Lex. That's why she has a 12-issue mini and not an on-going series. It's why no one has made a Lois Lane movie.

Two my criticism isn't that Lois is a woman who achieves impressive things, it's the increasing need for heroes to surround themselves with only equals. The fact that every person a hero interacts with on a regular basis is either another hero or someone at the very top of their field. Can't have Superman dating the 1,203rd greatest reporter, can we? And, of course, she has to be able to impress Batman with her investigative skills. Plus hey, she can kick the ass of the Eradicator. Why not. Superman couldn't possibly want to date a girl who writes the lovelorn column because no o0ne is letting her get her foot in the door as an actual beat reporter. Heaven forbid she nopt be someone whose very name strikes fear into crooked people's hearts.

[Nelliebly]

One, she is not the female lead of the franchise. She is a supporting character. The same as Jimmy, Perry, Martha, and Lex. That's why she has a 12-issue mini and not an on-going series. It's why no one has made a Lois Lane movie.

Two my criticism isn't that Lois is a woman who achieves impressive things, it's the increasing need for heroes to surround themselves with only equals. The fact that every person a hero interacts with on a regular basis is either another hero or someone at the very top of their field. Can't have Superman dating the 1,203rd greatest reporter, can we? And, of course, she has to be able to impress Batman with her investigative skills. Plus hey, she can kick the ass of the Eradicator. Why not. Superman couldn't possibly want to date a girl who writes the lovelorn column because no o0ne is letting her get her foot in the door as an actual beat reporter. Heaven forbid she nopt be someone whose very name strikes fear into crooked people's hearts.

Your first point is so obviously off base it doesn’t even really need a response but suffice it to say it’s ridiculous to say that Lois Lane is no different in stature than Jimmy, Perry or Martha. I love all of those characters but that’s absolutely ridiculous.

You are correct that there has been no Lois Lane movie but there most definitely was a freaking TV show watched by over 20 million people with her name in the title that a lot of people watched and liked. And there is about to be another show with her name in the TITLE. I love the actors who have played Jimmy and Perry white over the years but their characters are not at the level of female that Margot Kidder, Teri Hatcher, Erica Durance and Amy Adams achieved. If and when they greenlight a literal TV show watched my millions of people called “Perry and Clark” than you may have a point but they won’t.

She’s the female lead. Always has been. Always will be. I’m sorry that bothers you so much.

Second, I’m not sure why you are going on and on about what Lois’s success means to who Clark or dating or to Batman. Her success doesn’t have to be measured against them. Her life exists outside of Superman and, believe it or not, the women who love her don’t actually care about her being a great reporter because of how it makes ::Superman:: look because she’s not a possession or accessory only to him. She’s a character with her own agency and goals and fan base and her success as a journalist is about her and what ::she:: stands for.

Either way, this is all bizarre and sexist. Superman has every power in the world but Lois isn’t allowed to be exceptional in one area better than him? She isn’t allowed to be viewed as his equal? Because that brings Superman down somehow? He has every power in the damn world and it’s still a threat to his superiority to let Lois have this ONE thing? K.

[Yoda]

One, she is not the female lead of the franchise. She is a supporting character. The same as Jimmy, Perry, Martha, and Lex. That's why she has a 12-issue mini and not an on-going series. It's why no one has made a Lois Lane movie.

This is just wrong. Lois Lane, over the course of the last 40 years has unquestionably become the female lead of the Superman franchise. She's appeared centrally in every adaptation and the comics for the most part, with the notable exception of the New 52 where she was awkwardly shunted aside. She's had her own novel series, has multiple iconic representations in Mass media and is probable the most well know civilian character, with maybe Alfred as a close second. Sorry, but this is just no longer accurate and to say she's of the same stature or improtace as Jimmy, Ma, and Perry is ridiculous. In fact I don't think that's ever been true even going back the full 80 years.

Two my criticism isn't that Lois is a woman who achieves impressive things, it's the increasing need for heroes to surround themselves with only equals. The fact that every person a hero interacts with on a regular basis is either another hero or someone at the very top of their field. Can't have Superman dating the 1,203rd greatest reporter, can we? And, of course, she has to be able to impress Batman with her investigative skills. Plus hey, she can kick the ass of the Eradicator. Why not. Superman couldn't possibly want to date a girl who writes the lovelorn column because no o0ne is letting her get her foot in the door as an actual beat reporter. Heaven forbid she nopt be someone whose very name strikes fear into crooked people's hearts.

This has been addressed by others, but I'll just add that in the context of modern Superman stories her role as being the better reporter plays a more significant narrative purpose than your average character. She doesn't need to be beating up the Furies, but her role as a top notch reporter is a big part of why she works so well with Clark and their dynamic is that of equals in Journalism. I don't understand why that's some sort of issue, particularly with a character like Superman. Although, I'd add in the context of Rebirth and a Lois that's been married to Superman and intimately involved in his world for over a decade, the idea she'd have picked up a few things and would know her way around a mech suit isn't exactly a stretch.

It's kind of the same BS justification they gave at the start of the New 52 by making her "a best friend" they were doing her a favor because they were going to really show how special she was, then promptly ignored her whenever they could and blocked her from being used in stories. It's nonsense justification and kinda speaks to the insecurities of some Superman fans. Just look at how bent out of shape people get when Superman suggests that Kara is equal or better than he is. It's sacrilegious!

[seismic-2]

One, she is not the female lead of the franchise. She is a supporting character. The same as Jimmy, Perry, Martha, and Lex. That's why she has a 12-issue mini and not an on-going series. It's why no one has made a Lois Lane movie.

The Lois Lane comics book ran for 137 issues and 2 annuals, between 1958 and 1974. It was the third-best selling comic book published in 1962. If that's not the mark of a star, what is?

Lois was exceptional from the very inception. When Superman debuted, newspapers were very much a man's business. It was a very tough environment for a woman, and those few who were able to break into journalism were indeed regarded as huge stars in the profession. Lois was one of them.

[DochaDocha]

Heh, nice.

I'll just post hit-and-run style since I haven't really collected my thoughts.

Whether she's won awards or not, she should be excellent at her job. The award isn't necessary to validate your greatness. Susan Lucci didn't need that Emmy, Leo didn't his Oscar, and Albert Belle didn't need the 1995 American League MVP to prove they were great at what they did. There's a lot of bureaucracy your application has to go through for you to win, and that's not really something you can influence directly simply by doing your job better. So when I originally proposed whether she should have a Pulitzer, it's not to say she should be written as a less-competent journalist. It just means she's otherwise the same (skilled) person but without the recognition from Columbia University, which, for emphasis, is not the only barometer of how good that person is at her job.

Honestly, whenever in this type of fiction they say so-and-so has been given an award, it's usually some shorthand to indicate that the character is elite on the job. You could remove it altogether from, say, Man of Steel, and practically nothing changes except you removed a clunky line of exposition. The good parts of the movie actually show us she's good at her job. Fantastic, actually; she's the only person who was able to piece together all of the clues that Clark Kent was the mystery guy (believable or not). Compare that to Superman Returns where her award-winning column on "Why the World Doesn't Need Superman?" is more telling us that she's good and is largely the extent to which journalism plays a piece in her role of the movie. As an aside, I'd prefer that if she won such an award, it would be for investigative reporting, one of the 15 categories for which Pulitzers are awarded. And since we're talking movies, I can't say Superman I, II, or IV needed that kind of exposition, either. Nobody thinks less of the character because they didn't show a bunch of plaques on her wall.

As for the specific Pulitzer itself, the application process I think influences how any story of winning the prize should be written. Someone has to submit the piece, fill out the application form, pay the $75 application fee, etc. I kind of like a story where Lois is like "I don't care about awards, just doing my job right." Or maybe when she was younger (entry-level journalists make $#!t pay... my good buddy's first job paid him <$18k for a full-time gig...) she figured it was a bad way to spend $75. I also like the idea that Perry White's general motivation is he thinks not pushing his people to win awards is a way to keep them hungry and motivated so he himself never has someone submit an application on his staffers' behalf. On the other hand, Clark Kent would absolutely do it for Lois, which I didn't think about prior to this thread, so that changes my original opinion a little.

I think if her best work got submitted routinely, she'd eventually win, but that's, of course, contingent upon submission. Also, I think I commented prior that it'd be more interesting to see her win her first award in the pages of a comic/on screen than just be introduced as X-time Pulitzer Winner, Lois Lane.