Gothamist: You are Time's Person of the Year Cop-out

Gothamist's "Person of the Year"

Tue, 19 Dec 2006 03:32:34 -0500

I am Gothamist's "Person of the Year".

John

Mon, 18 Dec 2006 20:11:15 -0500

Maybe Gothamist should have our own person of the year.

REALITY CHECK

Mon, 18 Dec 2006 15:41:29 -0500

What if the "you" who happened to look at the cover was a very important world figure, who made important news headlines this past year? So I guess the cover could be technically correct at some point, albeit in a very lazy way.

timbnyc

Mon, 18 Dec 2006 11:32:22 -0500

They'll honor 'your' work, as long as they can figure out a way to make money off of it.

Lilitu

Mon, 18 Dec 2006 11:28:06 -0500

Right, Time magazine, no one was doing these things before 2006. Christ, that magazine gets more useless with every issue. This is almost as insipid as when they named Giuliani "Man of the Year" instead of the guy who actually made the damn impact. "Person of the Year" isn't a title of respect; it's about who made the biggest splash that year.

EricGewiz

Mon, 18 Dec 2006 11:19:40 -0500

There's a quote in today's Metro from their executive editor, saying basically, he didn't feel like naming Mahmoud Ahmadinejad person of the year. Not that I'm for that guy, but this is a cop-out on many reasons, particulary b/c he doesn't "feel" like naming someone else. It's almost as if we are all the fallback decision.

Irritated

Mon, 18 Dec 2006 11:19:25 -0500

Unbunch your panties--it's a magazine. Next week, something else will be on the cover. If you're really hot for Ahmadinejad, I'm sure you can find pics of the little troll all over the place.

aviatrix

Mon, 18 Dec 2006 10:42:22 -0500

Ah yes, I was pretty certain that my netflix favorites were far more important to the people of the world than war and peace, global warming, terrorism, economics. I rule!

Mark

Mon, 18 Dec 2006 10:28:55 -0500

"It's about the many wresting power from the few..." That's not really accurate, is it? Rupert Murdoch owns Myspace and Google (I think it was) now owns YouTube and Wikipedia is... well, sometimes right and sometimes a nice, fictional version of the way we'd like the world to really be.

S.D.

Mon, 18 Dec 2006 09:59:04 -0500

It's a cop out, but at least there's a rational behind it. Does this mean Gothamist can put a "Man(woman) of the year" icon at the top?? ;)

Toby

Mon, 18 Dec 2006 09:37:34 -0500

This proves one thing, how bloody irrelevant Time magazine is.