The Martha’s Vineyard Times has been named the 2025 New England Newspaper of the Year by the New England Newspaper and Press Association.
The recognition is the top honor given out by the association, which represents some 450 newspapers and specialty publications in the six states. The ceremony announcing the award was held this week at Hotel Northampton in Northampton.
The distinction was given to The Times for a weekly newspaper with a small circulation. The Times last received the award in 2019, the third year in a row it had won.
“A heartfelt congratulations to the whole team,” Owner Steve Bernier said.
“I’m truly in honor of the work this team does every day to serve our Island, and it’s thrilling to see much-deserved recognition for it,” added Publisher Charles Sennott.
The New England press association calls the Newspaper of the Year award a “one-of-a-kind competition.” The association said that it is the only distinction of its kind in the newspaper industry that is judged by audience members.
Also receiving recognition for the weekly newspaper small circulation category, the Vermont Standard out of Woodstock and the Provincetown Independent on the Cape both received “Distinguished Newspaper” awards.
w00000000000000t!!!!!
The spirit and intent of this paper is quite commendable every issue. Congrats
Congratulations! ?
Leftist scandal sheet.
Congratulations to the Martha’s Vineyard Times!
Although we don’t always agree, being named the 2025 Newspaper of the Year by the New England Newspaper and Press Association is a remarkable achievement and a testament to the paper’s role in serving the Vineyard community. The award, recognizing excellence among weekly newspapers with small circulation, highlights the Times’ continued dedication to quality journalism.
This recognition also marks a return to distinction after a three-year winning streak that last concluded in 2019, reaffirming the Times as one of New England’s most respected local news sources. The honor reflects the hard work of the staff, the strength of its reporting, and the paper’s ability to connect with readers in meaningful ways.
Congratulations again to the Martha’s Vineyard Times on this well-deserved achievement.
Congratulations to this fine local newspaper , for getting the recognition it deserves. Now of course, some people who have excessive amounts of hate in their hearts will call the editors and the owners leftists, communist. corrupt and all the the other right wing dog whistles. But the facts are what they are– This publication does a great job of providing accurate and timely stories about the issues of our time, whether they are local, regional, national or international. I hope the staff can savor the moment, and the haters can get over their preconceived biases and spare us from their vitriol. The Times got this prestigious award– they deserved it.
When the purpose is to congratulate a newspaper on winning a major award, the focus should be on honoring its achievement, not scolding or anticipating critics. The message to which I’m replying does begin with congratulations, but quickly shifts into attacking “haters” and discussing political name-calling. That diversion undermines the intent: instead of sounding like praise, it reads more like a defense or a rebuttal.
By bringing up detractors, said message introduces negativity into what should be a celebratory statement. It gives space and attention to people who may never have been part of the conversation in the first place, distracting from the real subject—the paper’s accomplishment. A genuine congratulations should highlight the hard work, quality journalism, and significance of the award itself.
Effective congratulations are positive, direct, and uplifting. Adding commentary about political opponents or critics risks watering down the recognition and leaves readers remembering the defensive tone instead of the honor being celebrated. The better approach is to let the achievement shine on its own.
Personal intolerance of opinions differing from one’s own does not define the opposing opinion as “hateful”. Just the opposite would be true, as is always the case with projections. The MVTimes editor does make the effort to allow for different voices to be heard.
Congrats to this newspaper.
There are no ”haters”. Just people who disagree and often one who disagrees is considers a hater. Charlie Kirk was an apologist for conservative and Judeo-Christian values yet he was in some circles considered a ”hater” That is unfortunate. MVTimes usually allows all manner of posts on varied subjects and should be commended.
Comments are closed.