Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking. Login or Take a Tour!
thenewgreen · 4789 days ago · link ·
I've got to say that I think this is opportunistic on TIMES part. They are picking the "person" of the year not the "sentiment" of the year. I honestly could give two shits about who the "person" of the year is, but this is definitely a "cop out".
What if next year the world experiences a huge surge of musical creativity? Will the TIME person of the year be "The Musician"? This is stupid. TIME is trying to be relevant but it's too late, they've run out of...nah, I won't go there.
–
forwardslash · 4789 days ago · link ·
The sad part is, they could've chosen just one person and still had it represent the 'sentiment': Mohamed Bouazizi.
–
Many people think it's a new trend that TIME is picking a "generic" Person of the Year, but if you look at the list, they've actually done it many times before: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Person_of_the_Year
1950 - The American fighting-man 1956 - The Hungarian freedom fighter 1960 - American Scientists 1966 - Baby Boomers 1969 - The Middle Americans 1975 - American women
–
Great point. This is from Wikipedia: "Person of the Year (formerly Man of the Year) is an annual issue of the United States newsmagazine Time that features and profiles a person, couple, group, idea, place, or machine that "for better or for worse, ...has done the most to influence the events of the year"
It isn't a new trend but it is a bad and misleading title.
–
thenewgreen · 4789 days ago · link ·
When I think of TIME, I think of this: http://i.imgur.com/h1hRG.jpg
