The Ramnath Goenka Excellence in Journalism Awards are given by which media group?

The correct answer is C, 2006. The Indian Express Group began the Ramnath Goenka Excellence in Journalism Awards in 2006, a little over a decade after the death of its founder, and the award now covers print, broadcast and digital reporting in a long list of categories, with a separate Journalist of the Year honour. Option A is wrong because 1996 is close to the year Ramnath Goenka died but no award was begun then. Option B is wrong because 2001 predates the award. Option D is wrong because by 2011 the awards had already run for several years. Examiners like founding years, so fix 2006 for the Ramnath Goenka Awards next to 1980 for the Chameli Devi Jain Award and 1917 for the first Pulitzer Prizes.

The correct answer is C, Columbia University. The Hungarian-born American publisher Joseph Pulitzer left money in his will to Columbia University in New York, which set up a school of journalism and the prizes that carry his name; the first Pulitzer Prizes were awarded in 1917 and are announced every year by the university on the recommendation of the Pulitzer Prize Board. Option A is wrong because Harvard, though also in the United States, has no role in the prize. Option B is wrong because Yale awards its own honours but not the Pulitzer. Option D is wrong because Princeton is unconnected with it. The trap in this question is that candidates remember New York but attach the prize to the wrong university, so store the pairing of Pulitzer with Columbia firmly.

The correct answer is C, 1917. Joseph Pulitzer died in 1911 and his will provided for the prizes, which Columbia University first gave out in 1917. Option A is wrong because 1901 is the year the Nobel Prizes were first awarded, a date candidates often transfer to the Pulitzer by mistake. Option B is wrong because 1911 is the year of Pulitzer's death, not of the first award. Option D is wrong because 1927 is far too late. A clean way to hold the sequence is Nobel 1901, Pulitzer 1917, Magsaysay 1957, Chameli Devi Jain 1980, Ramnath Goenka 2006. Questions in this area almost always test one of these founding years, and the Nobel and Pulitzer pair is the commonest trap of the set. Note also that the journalism categories are open mainly to work published by United States newspapers, magazines and news websites, which is why Indian winners appear through American organisations rather than through Indian ones.

The correct answer is A, Gobind Behari Lal. A science correspondent who had gone from Punjab to the United States, Gobind Behari Lal shared the Pulitzer Prize for Reporting in 1937 for his coverage of a scientific meeting, and he is remembered as the first Indian-born winner of the prize. Option B is wrong because the photojournalist Danish Siddiqui was part of a Reuters team honoured much later, in 2018, for pictures of the Rohingya crisis. Option C is wrong because Jhumpa Lahiri won the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction in 2000 for Interpreter of Maladies, which is a literature award and later than 1937. Option D is wrong because Dar Yasin was one of the Associated Press photographers honoured in 2020 for images from Kashmir.

The correct answer is B, P. Sainath. Palagummi Sainath received the Ramon Magsaysay Award in 2007 for journalism that placed the agrarian crisis, farmer suicides and rural poverty at the centre of national reporting, work also known through his book Everybody Loves a Good Drought. Option A is wrong because Arun Shourie won the Magsaysay Award earlier, in 1982, for investigative journalism in the Indian Express. Option C is wrong because the television journalist Ravish Kumar received the award in 2019. Option D is wrong because B. G. Verghese was honoured in 1975. All four names are genuine Indian winners in the journalism category, which is exactly why the question works: the year, not the name, is what is being tested. The award itself was instituted in 1957 and is administered from Manila, and the citation for Sainath praised his insistence that the rural poor be written about as people rather than as statistics in a table.