TIME Magazine drops the Ball....AGAIN!

[The Overlord Returns]

Well, TIME has announced it's "Person(s) of the Year for 2002:


http://www.time.com/time/personofthe.../poyintro.html

Now, why is it, for two years in a row now, they've made the wrong decisions? Last year the Person of the Year, the person who impacted the World the most (bad or good) was Rudy Giuliani?

Don't get me wrong, the man showed incredible leadership in New York, but everyone in their right mind knows the person of the Year should have ben Osama Bin Laden. No one affected the world moreso than the madman. Second place, obviously, would have been GWB.

Now, in 2002, when the honour should have actually gone to GWB (with Hussein coming a close second) they choose three women who, while exposing corruption in the US, had little impact on the world stage. By this Logic, the maryland snipers could have been given the distinction.

My query is: why is TIME afraid suddenly to make the right decisions. This is the same magazine that Gave the person of the year to Hitler, and twice to Stalin........what are they afraid of?

[Mr. JabbaJohnL]

Wow, that was an incredibly stupid decision. I've never heard of any of them!

[JediTricks]

What actually makes George W or Sadam strong candidates for "person of the year"? So far, it seems like a lot of posturing, but not exactly huge actions really. And what did Osama do in 2002? Nobody knows, it's been a big game of "Where's Waldo" after Sept 11th. To be honest, 2002 didn't seem much like a "person of the year" year anyway, lots of filler news and threats of things that may happen news, but few giant impact issues seem to have happened in this year as far as I can tell. Worldcom and Enron were actually very big news in some ways, these individual corporations controlled or affected vast amounts of the world's information and currency, all while enjoying the fruits of shenanigans. As I understand it, in some countries in Europe, the entire internet goes through Worldcom systems. Perhaps they're not as exciting, but they are things that actually happened in 2002.

[The Overlord Returns]

Originally posted by JediTricks
What actually makes George W or Sadam strong candidates for "person of the year"? So far, it seems like a lot of posturing, but not exactly huge actions really. And what did Osama do in 2002? Nobody knows, it's been a big game of "Where's Waldo" after Sept 11th. To be honest, 2002 didn't seem much like a "person of the year" year anyway, lots of filler news and threats of things that may happen news, but few giant impact issues seem to have happened in this year as far as I can tell. Worldcom and Enron were actually very big news in some ways, these individual corporations controlled or affected vast amounts of the world's information and currency, all while enjoying the fruits of shenanigans. As I understand it, in some countries in Europe, the entire internet goes through Worldcom systems. Perhaps they're not as exciting, but they are things that actually happened in 2002.

I meant Bin Laden for 2001 JT. Ofcourse, he's been a grey ghost of sorts this year. GWB and saddam have been the biggest news makers on a world stage. They've effected the world more than these whistle blowers, who are more important to americans, rather than the world. Perhaps they should have been named american newsmakers of the year, much as Paul Martin was named canadian newsmaker of the year ( I disagree with that as well, but, que sera...)

[eyEdeaD JEDI]

We all know it should have been George Lucas for making the best Star Wars movie ever... PERIOD.