TIME - Person of the Year - Fantasy Baseball Cafe 2014 Fantasy Baseball Cafe
100% Deposit Bonus for Cafe Members!

Return to General Talk

TIME - Person of the Year

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

Postby Coppermine » Sun Dec 17, 2006 6:50 pm

The Miner Part 2 wrote:
thedude wrote:
Wikipedia wrote:The [Person of the Year] title is frequently mistaken as being an honor. Many, including some members of the American media, continue to wrongly perpetuate the idea that the position of "Person of the Year" is a reward or prize, despite the magazine's frequent statements to the contrary.



Great! I just got the same award as Hitler, Ayatollah Khomeini, Joseph Stalin, and Nikita Khrushchev. Thanks Time. I feel like i am in great company. :-P ;-7


the fact that it came down to amadenajad, kim jong il, and us, doesn't make me feel all that special.


People keep forgetting that it's not "Best Person of the Year." It's the person who made the biggest impact on the news and current events, and quite often that's not a nice guy. I'm actually very surprised Bin Laden didn't get it in 2001, and he would have if we weren't so sensitive to that at the time.

The title is frequently mistaken as being an honor. Many, including some members of the American media, continue to wrongly perpetuate the idea that the position of "Person of the Year" is a reward or prize, despite the magazine's frequent statements to the contrary. Part of the confusion stems from the fact that many admirable people have been given the title—perhaps the majority. Thus, journalists will frequently describe a new person of the year as having "joined the ranks" of past winners such as Martin Luther King. The fact that people such as Adolf Hitler have been granted the title as well is often less well-known.

There was a massive public backlash in the United States after Time named Ayatollah Khomeini as Man of the Year in 1979, which caused thousands of subscribers to end their subscription. Since then, Time has generally shied away from choosing controversial candidates. Time's Person of the Year 2001 — in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks — was New York mayor Rudolph Giuliani. It was a somewhat controversial result; many thought that Giuliani was deserving, but many others thought that the rules of selection ("the individual or group of individuals who have had the biggest effect on the year's news") made the obvious choice Osama bin Laden. They cited previous choices such as Adolf Hitler to demonstrate that Person of the Year did not necessarily mean "best human being of the year." It is interesting to note that the issue which declared Rudolph Giuliani as Person of the Year included an article that mentioned Time's earlier decision to make Ayatollah Khomeini as Man of the Year in 1979 and the 1999 rejection of Hitler as "Person of the Century." The article seemed to imply that Osama bin Laden was a stronger candidate than Giuliani for Person of the Year and Hitler was a stronger candidate than Albert Einstein for Person of the Century, but they were not ultimately selected due to what the magazine described as their "negative" influence on history.

According to stories in respected newspapers, Time's editors anguished over the choice, reasonably fearing that selecting the al-Qaeda leader might offend readers and advertisers. Bin Laden had already appeared on its covers on October 1, November 12, and November 26. Many readers expressed dissatisfaction at the idea of seeing his face on the cover again. In the end, Giuliani's selection led some to criticize that Time had failed to uphold its own declared standards.
If you're a battery, you're either working or you're dead....
Coppermine
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar

Posts: 8840
Joined: 6 Sep 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Pennsyltucky

Postby Half Massed » Sun Dec 17, 2006 7:03 pm

Well, usually person of the [time period] is a good thing in most settings. Maybe they should change the title to Most Impactful Person of the Year or something. I guess it would be tough to change now.
Image
Half Massed
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterEagle EyePick 3 Weekly WinnerSweet 16 Survivor
Posts: 4084
Joined: 27 Feb 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Busting ghosts

Postby acsguitar » Sun Dec 17, 2006 7:03 pm

I decline this honor and give it to Daisuke Matsuzaka
acsguitar
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Graphics Expert
Posts: 26722
Joined: 7 Apr 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Back in General Talk WOOO!!!

Postby Coppermine » Sun Dec 17, 2006 7:25 pm

Half Massed wrote:Well, usually person of the [time period] is a good thing in most settings. Maybe they should change the title to Most Impactful Person of the Year or something. I guess it would be tough to change now.


But "Person of the Year" is even more ambiguous (and less cumbersome) than "Most Impactful Person of the Year." It doesn't denote anything at all; it's our perception that it should be an honor. The title really doesn't convey that though. We assume because Martin Luther King, Jr. has been "Person of the Year" before that it must be the most admirable, but that's certainly not the case.

It's just whoever (or whatever) is the most newsworthy.... and we all know that news, more often than not, isn't very flattering.
If you're a battery, you're either working or you're dead....
Coppermine
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar

Posts: 8840
Joined: 6 Sep 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Pennsyltucky

Postby The Miner Part 2 » Sun Dec 17, 2006 8:10 pm

saying the person of the year is "you" is a weak cop-out. you can say that every single year. make a decision.
Image
The Miner Part 2
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Mock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 3757
Joined: 16 Sep 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Throwing rocks at The Cubby Bear.

Postby The Miner Part 2 » Sun Dec 17, 2006 8:13 pm

Coppermine wrote:
The Miner Part 2 wrote:
thedude wrote:
Wikipedia wrote:The [Person of the Year] title is frequently mistaken as being an honor. Many, including some members of the American media, continue to wrongly perpetuate the idea that the position of "Person of the Year" is a reward or prize, despite the magazine's frequent statements to the contrary.



Great! I just got the same award as Hitler, Ayatollah Khomeini, Joseph Stalin, and Nikita Khrushchev. Thanks Time. I feel like i am in great company. :-P ;-7


the fact that it came down to amadenajad, kim jong il, and us, doesn't make me feel all that special.


People keep forgetting that it's not "Best Person of the Year." It's the person who made the biggest impact on the news and current events, and quite often that's not a nice guy. I'm actually very surprised Bin Laden didn't get it in 2001, and he would have if we weren't so sensitive to that at the time.

The title is frequently mistaken as being an honor. Many, including some members of the American media, continue to wrongly perpetuate the idea that the position of "Person of the Year" is a reward or prize, despite the magazine's frequent statements to the contrary. Part of the confusion stems from the fact that many admirable people have been given the title—perhaps the majority. Thus, journalists will frequently describe a new person of the year as having "joined the ranks" of past winners such as Martin Luther King. The fact that people such as Adolf Hitler have been granted the title as well is often less well-known.

There was a massive public backlash in the United States after Time named Ayatollah Khomeini as Man of the Year in 1979, which caused thousands of subscribers to end their subscription. Since then, Time has generally shied away from choosing controversial candidates. Time's Person of the Year 2001 — in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks — was New York mayor Rudolph Giuliani. It was a somewhat controversial result; many thought that Giuliani was deserving, but many others thought that the rules of selection ("the individual or group of individuals who have had the biggest effect on the year's news") made the obvious choice Osama bin Laden. They cited previous choices such as Adolf Hitler to demonstrate that Person of the Year did not necessarily mean "best human being of the year." It is interesting to note that the issue which declared Rudolph Giuliani as Person of the Year included an article that mentioned Time's earlier decision to make Ayatollah Khomeini as Man of the Year in 1979 and the 1999 rejection of Hitler as "Person of the Century." The article seemed to imply that Osama bin Laden was a stronger candidate than Giuliani for Person of the Year and Hitler was a stronger candidate than Albert Einstein for Person of the Century, but they were not ultimately selected due to what the magazine described as their "negative" influence on history.

According to stories in respected newspapers, Time's editors anguished over the choice, reasonably fearing that selecting the al-Qaeda leader might offend readers and advertisers. Bin Laden had already appeared on its covers on October 1, November 12, and November 26. Many readers expressed dissatisfaction at the idea of seeing his face on the cover again. In the end, Giuliani's selection led some to criticize that Time had failed to uphold its own declared standards.


and i don't think anyone is forgetting anything when what you are posting is already in this thread.
Image
The Miner Part 2
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Mock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 3757
Joined: 16 Sep 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Throwing rocks at The Cubby Bear.

Postby The Artful Dodger » Sun Dec 17, 2006 8:35 pm

JTWood wrote:
The Artful Dodger wrote:
BritSox wrote:Does this mean I get to put 'TIME Man of the year 2006' on my resume?


I know I am, but because everyone else is entitled to put that down in their resumes, well then, you don't stick out from the crowd. Thus, we're all nothing special. :-D

On the other hand, if everyone else was person of the year, and you don't put it on your resume, too, what's that saying about you?


It either means I have an inferiority complex or everyone else has an overinflated opinion of themselves.
Image
The Artful Dodger
Chief Wikitect
Chief Wikitect

User avatar
CafeholicResponse TeamFantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyePick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 21672
(Past Year: 452)
Joined: 3 Feb 2006
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Not nineteen forever

Postby Coppermine » Sun Dec 17, 2006 9:59 pm

The Miner Part 2 wrote:
Coppermine wrote:
The Miner Part 2 wrote:
thedude wrote:
Wikipedia wrote:The [Person of the Year] title is frequently mistaken as being an honor. Many, including some members of the American media, continue to wrongly perpetuate the idea that the position of "Person of the Year" is a reward or prize, despite the magazine's frequent statements to the contrary.



Great! I just got the same award as Hitler, Ayatollah Khomeini, Joseph Stalin, and Nikita Khrushchev. Thanks Time. I feel like i am in great company. :-P ;-7


the fact that it came down to amadenajad, kim jong il, and us, doesn't make me feel all that special.


People keep forgetting that it's not "Best Person of the Year." It's the person who made the biggest impact on the news and current events, and quite often that's not a nice guy. I'm actually very surprised Bin Laden didn't get it in 2001, and he would have if we weren't so sensitive to that at the time.

The title is frequently mistaken as being an honor. Many, including some members of the American media, continue to wrongly perpetuate the idea that the position of "Person of the Year" is a reward or prize, despite the magazine's frequent statements to the contrary. Part of the confusion stems from the fact that many admirable people have been given the title—perhaps the majority. Thus, journalists will frequently describe a new person of the year as having "joined the ranks" of past winners such as Martin Luther King. The fact that people such as Adolf Hitler have been granted the title as well is often less well-known.

There was a massive public backlash in the United States after Time named Ayatollah Khomeini as Man of the Year in 1979, which caused thousands of subscribers to end their subscription. Since then, Time has generally shied away from choosing controversial candidates. Time's Person of the Year 2001 — in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks — was New York mayor Rudolph Giuliani. It was a somewhat controversial result; many thought that Giuliani was deserving, but many others thought that the rules of selection ("the individual or group of individuals who have had the biggest effect on the year's news") made the obvious choice Osama bin Laden. They cited previous choices such as Adolf Hitler to demonstrate that Person of the Year did not necessarily mean "best human being of the year." It is interesting to note that the issue which declared Rudolph Giuliani as Person of the Year included an article that mentioned Time's earlier decision to make Ayatollah Khomeini as Man of the Year in 1979 and the 1999 rejection of Hitler as "Person of the Century." The article seemed to imply that Osama bin Laden was a stronger candidate than Giuliani for Person of the Year and Hitler was a stronger candidate than Albert Einstein for Person of the Century, but they were not ultimately selected due to what the magazine described as their "negative" influence on history.

According to stories in respected newspapers, Time's editors anguished over the choice, reasonably fearing that selecting the al-Qaeda leader might offend readers and advertisers. Bin Laden had already appeared on its covers on October 1, November 12, and November 26. Many readers expressed dissatisfaction at the idea of seeing his face on the cover again. In the end, Giuliani's selection led some to criticize that Time had failed to uphold its own declared standards.


and i don't think anyone is forgetting anything when what you are posting is already in this thread.


Oh, yeah, my fault... I missed that
If you're a battery, you're either working or you're dead....
Coppermine
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar

Posts: 8840
Joined: 6 Sep 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Pennsyltucky

Postby acsguitar » Sun Dec 17, 2006 10:44 pm

Ladanian Tomlinson should be Person of the Year
acsguitar
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Graphics Expert
Posts: 26722
Joined: 7 Apr 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Back in General Talk WOOO!!!

Postby Omaha Red Sox » Mon Dec 18, 2006 9:49 am

acsguitar wrote:Ladanian Tomlinson should be Person of the Year


:-°

I think it's a bit pathetic that Time couldn't find anyone besides internet users to be their Person Of The Year 2006. I'm not a Time reader and was not aware of their, uh, track record either... :-°
Omaha Red Sox
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle Eye
Posts: 11420
(Past Year: 10)
Joined: 29 Jun 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Probably over there

PreviousNext

Return to General Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ICBattethy, unioreimi and 5 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Today's Games
Monday, Apr. 21
(All times are EST, weather icons show forecast for game time)

Baltimore at Boston
(11:05 am)
Kansas City at Cleveland
(7:05 pm)
Cincinnati at Pittsburgh
(7:05 pm)
LA Angels at Washington
(7:05 pm)
Chi White Sox at Detroit
(7:08 pm)
St. Louis at NY Mets
(7:10 pm)
Miami at Atlanta
(7:10 pm)
Arizona at Chi Cubs
(8:05 pm)
San Diego at Milwaukee
(8:10 pm)
San Francisco at Colorado
(8:40 pm)
Texas at Oakland
(10:05 pm)
Philadelphia at LA Dodgers
(10:10 pm)
Houston at Seattle
(10:10 pm)

  • Fantasy Baseball
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact