HOW WERE WINNERS PICKED?

Here are some of the criteria that the judges used:

1) Does the writer make the subject interesting? Does the first paragraph draw you in and make you want to read more? This is the crux of any piece of writing, whether a letter, an essay, or a novel.

2) Is the enthusiasm of the writer conveyed to the reader?

3) Is there a natural progression of the subject from beginning to end?

4) Is there a reason for anything (and everything) that is included? There should be nothing extraneous: not everything that a writer knows has to be included, just because the event happened that way. Just because you went to six places on a trip does not mean that all six need to be included, if they don't feature in the story.

5) In terms of writing: do the paragraphs track from the previous ones, supporting the theme in a progression? Did the writer make an effort to go back and check the grammar, spelling, and the sentences? Editing and polishing are as important as writing.

6) Grammar can certainly be "played with" to make an effect, but does it here aid or hinder the article? Even discounting the possibility of a poor translation, are sentences complete, for example? Do sentences vary in length, with not too many long sentences in a row?

7) Is everything explained that needs to be, so the reader isn't left feeling unsatisfied?

8) Do the photos illustrate the story in a meaningful way?