VirginA340 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 15 posts, RR: 0 Posted (13 years 12 months 19 hours ago) and read 2832 times:
Is TIME magazine smoking crack again or what!?! I heard on FOX news that time has a short list of people 4 man of the year and Osama is a strong possibility to be on the cover!?! This is not the first time Time has commited to being this stupid. In 1938 it was Hitler, In 1979 it was Ayatollah Khomeini and Stalin made it both times in 1939 and 1942. TIME ahs gone too far. why don't they put "Men of the Year and commit the cover to the FDNY/EMS, PAPD and NYPD? Outrageaous! what a waste of paper.
YHU From Canada, joined Jun 2000, 436 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (13 years 12 months 19 hours ago) and read 2738 times:
Is the reason that Hitler and so on made it not because Man of the Year is for the person who most influenced the world on the past year? Or something like that? You have to admit, not one effected the world this year as much as he did. It doesn't have to be in a good way, just like Hitler. What he did effected the whole world, as terrible as it was.
LH423 From Canada, joined Jul 1999, 6501 posts, RR: 52
Reply 7, posted (13 years 12 months 19 hours ago) and read 2742 times:
You people are misunderstanding the purpose of the Man Of The Year! It is not necessarily an honour. The purpose of the Man Of The Year issue is to remark on the people who have changed our lives, either positive or negative. I think it is quite suitable that Osama Bin Laden be on the cover, because who else has had more of an impact on the citizens of the world than Osama?
Remember, it's not an honour, especially for someone guilty of such a heinous crime.
« On ne voit bien qu'avec le cœur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux » Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
Pilot1113 From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 2333 posts, RR: 11
Reply 8, posted (13 years 12 months 19 hours ago) and read 2732 times:
The "Man of the Year" title goes to whoever manages to dominate the headlines for the majority of the year.
Last year it was George W. Bush because he dominated the majority of the headlines. If Gore had won he would have become "Man of Year" because he would have gotten more headlines, being president and all.
Alpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (13 years 12 months 18 hours ago) and read 2716 times:
The Man/Woman of the year is the person Time feels has the biggest impact on world events for that year. You tell me someone who has had a larger impact? This isn't like People Magazine's "Sexiest Person In The World" issue-it isn't a popularity contest, and it shouldn't be. This is who influenced events the most, and he certianly can fit the bill.
Unfortunately, to make things PC, they'll probably pick President Bush instead, because too many readers think it's just another popularity test. I say he should be Man Of the Year, because the act he masterminded has completely changed the political, social, economic, physchological and military landscape of the United States, inded the world.
Dasa From East Timor, joined Aug 2001, 760 posts, RR: 6
Reply 12, posted (13 years 12 months 18 hours ago) and read 2710 times:
Exactly, All those who said the "Man Of The Year" award is for the one person who influenced the world and dominated the headlines greatly is correct. You don't necessarily have to have influenced the world by doing good to ebcome Man Of The Year.
Take a look at this link for some more information:
DesertJets From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 7876 posts, RR: 14
Reply 22, posted (13 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 2630 times:
Time has done stupider things with Man of the Year... like the year that Time/Warner bought Turner Broadcasting and Ted Turner was Man of the Year... makes you go hmmm.. Plus Stalin was man of the year in 44 I believe. Bush last year was a complete cop out if you ask me. But if anything I'd be willing to bet that Guiliani gets it... or maybe they'll do a joint MOTY with Randy Johnson and Curt Schilling.
Stop drop and roll will not save you in hell. --- seen on a church marque in rural Virginia