MyDD :: We, The People of the Year

We, The People of the Year

by Nancy Scola, Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 09:37:15 PM EST

Jonathan's right. This is a sleepy news Sunday. Perhaps it's that it's the third night of Hanukkah or that it's just a week before Christmas. Or maybe everyone's busy celebrating their Time Person of the Year win. I'm with Markos in tagging this a cop-out, though perhaps not surprising following years where the picks were "The American Soldier" and "Whistleblowers." Next year the magazine's cover will just be blank and will arrive in the mail with a crayon taped to it with which you can express your singular vision by just drawing someone's face in. Or a picture of your cat. Whatever. It's your world, the rest of us just live in it.

I can't help but think this is somehow part of a troubling trend. "You're the person of the year." Yay! "We're gonna be greeted as liberators." Okay! "He's a Democrat, even though the Democrats picked somebody else." Um, sure. I'm half joking about this, but half not. What I find most upsetting is this kind of sentiment, used to explain why the pick for the person who "for better or worse, has most influenced events in the preceding year" wasn't Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad:

"If you choose an individual, you have to justify how that person affected millions of people," said Richard Stengel, who took over as Time's managing editor earlier this year. "But if you choose millions of people, you don't have to justify it to anyone."

Yes, wouldn't want to have to make a journalistic choice that you might have to defend to your reading audience. Or perhaps the American people want a news media that, you know, makes considered decisions and judgments, even if those decisions and judgments might take us a little time to process.

Tags: media (all tags)

Permalink :: 16 Comments :: Post a Comment

I guess I took it very differently (3.00 / 1)

...that they recognized the emergence of people-power and the growing ability of the teaming masses to organize and challenge the established structures.

by MNPundit on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 09:42:12 PM EST

People power (none / 0)

I get that and totally appreciate it. And I was intrigued by the idea that Time would recognize that the individual -- powered by the Internet and other connective technologies -- was perhaps the most significant force of 2006. But the article itself (and the accompanying ones on lonelygirl15, etc.) and the quotes by Stengel like the one above and where he said that selecting Ahmadinejad "just felt to me a little off" give the sense that this was less a genuine embrace of people power and more a chance to dodge a tough journalistic decision while getting some Web 2.0 cred.

by Nancy Scola on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 10:09:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: We, The People of the Year (3.00 / 2)

He said that? What a putz.

by Mullibok on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 09:59:13 PM EST

Time Magazine is run by morons. (3.00 / 2)

Rudy Giuliani was the singe person on Earth who most impacted humanity in 2001? Seriously? You sure it wasn't the guy who ploughed two planes into the WTC, killed 3,000 innocent people, and changed America forever?

George W. Bush was the single person on Earth who most impacted humanity in 2004? Why? 'Cause he's a "revolutionary"? What makes you say that? Ohhhhh...'cause he got re-elected! OK.

Who is the single person on Earth who most impacted humanity in 2004? Is it the President of Iran, who may one day destroy us all? Is it the Supreme Leader of North Korea, who could theoretically blow up Seattle? Is it the President of Venezuela, who is reinventing the entire Latin American region in his own image, and bucking the U.S. while he does it? Is it, for God's sake, Rahm Emanuel and Chuck Schumer, who played a major role in the Democrats finally retaking the Capitol?

Hell, no! It was...you! Why? 'Cause we're too chickenshit to pick someone that'll piss people off!

God save us from the "free" press!

by craverguy on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 10:00:47 PM EST

Re: Time Magazine is run by morons. (none / 0)

That thirs one should be "2006."

by craverguy on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 10:01:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: We, The People of the Year (none / 0)

I seriously don't understand the hostility to this pick. I mean, I think the point is a celebration of the user-created web, and we're all happy about that...right? But if everybody just wants to get snobby about it, that's fine. That's a lot of fun. Shows how superior we all are. Right?

DC Secularism Examiner

by Qshio on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 10:20:26 PM EST

Certainly don't mean to be snobbish (none / 0)

My love runs deep for user-created content, collective action, the upending of existing power structures, and all the great stuff that that the read-write Web has brought us. But that a national news magazine chose "us," the creators of the living Web and such -- and that they've in the past chosen "the American soldier" and the Enron whistleblowers -- as the one thing that (by their own criteria) "has most influenced events in the preceding year" in the entire world shows me that in this case they are somewhat less than serious about fullfilling their journalistic mission.

It's not an indictment of Time all the the time, or media writ large, or what have you. But I'm suggesting their choices concerning this whole Person of the Year thing could be better made.

by Nancy Scola on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 10:54:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

next picks (3.00 / 4)

The American Consumer
The American Voter
The American Worker
We give up

New Jersey politics and news

by John DE on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 11:02:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

They're Atoning For Failing To Name The Pet Rock (none / 0)

back in, oh, what year was that???

by Paul Rosenberg on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 01:29:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Atoning For Failing To Name The Pet Rock (none / 0)

Uh, they did so in 2004.

Oh, sorry, I thought you wrote, "dumber than a box of rocks." My mistake.

543,895 votes

by Michael Bersin on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 08:12:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

There wouldn't have been the change in Congress (none / 0)

...without user-generated content.

I like Time Magazine's choice.

by EricJaffa on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 11:20:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: We, The People of the Year (none / 0)

It should have been Nancy Pelosi. Duh.

by lorax on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 11:04:09 PM EST

Re: We, The People of the Year (3.00 / 1)

I find it troubling that journalists are so lazy anymore. I do not think them bias like alot of people but, really, really lazy. It's just too much trouble to google things, call people or meet them and chat with them to get a good story and the facts right. Forget all that check you sources stuff. and the who, what, when, why and how is just to troubling to keep straight. Besides they have thier great american novel they are working on for the last 10 years to get started they don't have time to worry thier pretty little heads over something as nasty as work.

by vwcat on Sun Dec 17, 2006 at 11:50:17 PM EST

The Person Of Next Year: Lifeforms! (3.00 / 1)

I'm with Markos in tagging this a cop-out, though perhaps not surprising following years where the picks were "The American Soldier" and "Whistleblowers." Next year the magazine's cover will just be blank and will arrive in the mail with a crayon taped to it with which you can express your singular vision by just drawing someone's face in. Or a picture of your cat. Whatever.

There's a definite progression here, Nancy, so go with it! Who says the Versailles media is narrow-minded and lacking in vision? Why, next year, the Person of the Year will be ultra-democratic, including amoeba, blue-green algae, yeast, you name it!

They'll show us who's got the vision thing!

by Paul Rosenberg on Mon Dec 18, 2006 at 01:27:43 AM EST

They're scared (none / 0)

They see the circulation numbers. They see the ratings.

They're losing the 18-34s. They're not getting them back this way.

by jayackroyd on Tue Dec 19, 2006 at 09:01:55 AM EST

Re: We, The People of the Year (none / 0)

53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137