I’ll be honest, this is the first I’m hearing that Time’s person of the year isn’t a celebration of a given year’s most positively-influential person. Granted, I don’t read Time, but I don’t think it’s all that common knowledge that “person of the year” isn’t always a compliment. I mean, I’ve seen several of “___ of the year” awards, and most ended with applauding and rewarding the winner; if Time wants people who don’t read it to know that its award doesn’t follow common conventions, it should probably title it something to obviously differentiate itself.
Time magazine “Person of the year” doesn’t necessarily mean “good” it means “pivotal to change”. The “change” may not be a good change.
Hitler, Stalin, Khrushchev, Kissinger, Ted Turner, Newt Gingrich, Putin, Zuckerberg, and Turmp have all been Person of the Year.
Bin Laden was supposed to be person of the year in 2001 but there was backlash from idiots that didn’t know what it meant.
I’ll be honest, this is the first I’m hearing that Time’s person of the year isn’t a celebration of a given year’s most positively-influential person. Granted, I don’t read Time, but I don’t think it’s all that common knowledge that “person of the year” isn’t always a compliment. I mean, I’ve seen several of “___ of the year” awards, and most ended with applauding and rewarding the winner; if Time wants people who don’t read it to know that its award doesn’t follow common conventions, it should probably title it something to obviously differentiate itself.
Can we stop giving idiots powerful voices please?