I have nothing better to do, and I didn’t see this mentioned anywhere else yet, so here’s the annual Time Magazine Person of the Year speculation thread…
I think it comes down to two people at the moment:
I would like to thing the person of the year would be someone that did something in a positive manner. Trump has done nothing positive.
Other possibles:
That would be nice. However, it is my understanding that the criterion is “most important” not necessarily “most positive.” Hitler was the winner for 1938. Here is Time’s explanation.
“Hitler became in 1938 the greatest threatening force that the democratic, freedom-loving world faces today”
Until now.
Has anything really changed since either of these two won (2022 and 2019, respectively) to warrant a repeat selection so soon - well, other than an increase in snooker matches being interrupted by Just Stop Oil types with their orange powder?
As for my suggestion that they may be saving Trump for 2024, everybody takes a back seat to the Artemis crew if they do land on the moon by the end of that year - shades of 1968.
The NAFO fella:
How about Jack Smith?
Possibly a combo with Fani Willis. Or maybe just “the prosecutors.”
My feeling is this will be too much of an unfinished story to rise to that level this year.
Thank you! I think even considering him is disgusting.
There’s also her Imagination Library.
Jack Smith hands down.
I agree it’s long past time for Time Magazine, itself a pale mostly useless shadow of its former glory to retire the “… for good or ill” part of its Man of the Year program.
If you’re too damned lazy to find the best of the good, sure don’t settle for the worst of the bad.
How about “Mother Nature?” Though fictional, she’s certainly had an incredibly influential impact all over the globe.
IIRC, they have done “The Earth” before.
But I think most likely is the folks in the justice system working to take down Trump, including Jack Smith, Fanny Willis, and the various judges. Smith if they want one individual, though they might go for all of them collectively.
More honestly it’s “Person who is going to get the most people talking about Time once a year.” Having the discussion every year about how it’s not a prize for the best person gets people talking.
Though, in practice, they dropped the “or ill” decades ago. That’s why, for instance, it was Giuliani in 2001, instead of bin Laden.
Yes. After some serious backlash over the choice of Ayatollah Khomenei in 1979 it became an understood though unwritten practice to not award to figures that would appall the American public. Which is still NOT the same thing as being a choice of whoever did most for the “good”: e.g. Putin 2007.
As it is you still get debate and pushback anyway - was Greta Thunberg uniformly seen as most influential individual in 2019? Or just the most recognizable face to put on the climate issue? And a whole half of the country would say she did nothing worthy.
They have been known to every so often put on the cover group choices like “American Scientists” in 1960, “Whistleblowers” in 2002, or the Me-Too “Silence Breakers” in 2017; or “conceptual” choices like “Middle Americans” 1969, “The Computer” 1982, “Endangered Earth” 1988, “You” (a mirror) 2006.
According to NASA’s Artemis III page, the lunar landing won’t be until 2025. Yes, Artemis II will have the first woman orbiting the moon, and that will most likely be in 2024, but they’re not going to give it to astronauts two years in a row (remember that Neil Armstrong didn’t get it in 1969, in no small part because the Apollo 8 astronauts got it in 1968).
Speaking of waiting, Time may be waiting for convictions in 2024 before giving it to the Trump prosecutors/indictors, especially if Biden is re-elected.
House Light Bulb Moment…
The favorite has to be the striking actors and writers - especially as every network is reduced to reality TV and repeats this fall (well, except for Fox, which has new episodes of its animated shows ready).