Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The Ebola caregivers. They don't ask for recognition or celebrity status. For the most part they're volunteers, risking their lives every day to help others. Some have died delivering that help - more will die in the days and months to come. That's where my vote goes.
 
Taylor Swift person of the year ?

Just wow.

that's all I got.

Even if it's by influence, not likability (Hitler won in 1938 for example), Swift is not an influential musician. She is yet another bland pop artist of the last few years. She has absolutely nothing to contribute musically, her lyrics are entirely concerning superficial personal matters, and she hasn't done anything remarkable outside of her successful career.

I mean, how could she be nominated for person of the year when people like Richard D. James, Thom Yorke or Marshal Mathers never having won in the past? Love them or hate them, artists like these have had profound influence on contemporary music as a whole.

It would be an embarrassment to humanity to give someone so disposable such high praise.
 
Wow.

If he wins something over people caring for Ebola victims, our world is doomed.

People cared for, what, 20 ebola victims? What Jobs does effects millions and millions of people. It's about people that effect many people.
 
People cared for, what, 20 ebola victims? What Jobs does effects millions and millions of people. It's about people that effect many people.

Those 20 Ebola patients could turn into 200 then 2000 pretty quick. They sacrifice their own life just so the virus stays where it began. I dunno I find that pretty damn impressive.
 
One vote for the Doge over here...such laughter...much deserving...

I, seriously, would like to see the ebola caregivers win, people who are making important differences in the world.
 
This is not about the best/nicest/coolest person of the year. It's for the most influential. Has nothing to do with good vs evil.

Swift is not influential musically. She is another bland pop artist in a sea of bland pop artists.

Richard D James? Thom Yorke? Marshal Mathers? Andre 3000? Kanye West?

I don't even like all of those artists but I'll be damned if I didn't admit that they have been hugely influential musically.

Swift does not even deserve to be in the same category as game changers like these.
 
People cared for, what, 20 ebola victims? What Jobs does effects millions and millions of people. It's about people that effect many people.

20, really? Obviously you only read about it when it's about a patient treated in a developed country.
 
4 pages of replies and the vast majority have zero understanding of what the "TIME person of the year " even is. So many people seem to think it's some kind of award for doing something good?

It's not. It goes to the most newsworthy person/group/story of the year. That's it. Putin is probably the logical choice in that respect.
 
I find the list very underwhelming.

Maybe that's a good sign.

Despots haven't had their normal impact.
 
Can people please read the damn criteria for nominations before making stupid comments? Please.


Question: How could TIME even consider bin Laden for Man of the Year? I'm a TIME subscriber and could not believe they would consider someone of his caliber.

Jim Kelly: Well, the classic definition of TIME's Person of the Year is the person who most affected the events of the year, for better or for worse. I think what has happened over the years is that the Man of the Year title, Person of the Year title, has become non-honorific. It was never meant to be solely that.
 
Ferguson protesters? You mean the tactless, classless asshats that thought that the best way to rally support for your cause was to occupy freeways during rush hour like ****ing idiots?

To hell with Ferguson protesters, there's a time and a place and on the freeway during rush hour ain't it.
 
Every single year people have the same reaction.

Again, Time's Person of the Year has no relevance to who is good, beneficial, made a good impact, etc. It is solely about influence and impact on the global stage within a years time.

Putin and Swift are among the most impactful within their respective worlds -- Swift in the music industry and Putin in world politics. It has nothing to do with how "good" they are.
 
Ferguson protesters? You mean the tactless, classless asshats that thought that the best way to rally support for your cause was to occupy freeways during rush hour like ****ing idiots?

To hell with Ferguson protesters, there's a time and a place and on the freeway during rush hour ain't it.

If it were someone you cared and loved that got shot and killed by a LEO, would you think the same?

----------

Swift is not influential musically. She is another bland pop artist in a sea of bland pop artists.

Richard D James? Thom Yorke? Marshal Mathers? Andre 3000? Kanye West?

I don't even like all of those artists but I'll be damned if I didn't admit that they have been hugely influential musically.

Swift does not even deserve to be in the same category as game changers like these.

It might have something to do with what happened with Spotify.
 
Besides some teeny boppers, precisely who has Taylor Swift influenced? I do not understand her inclusion in this list.

Good question. Even following Time's guidelines it makes no sense to have her on the list. Maybe a People Magazine best of list, but not Time's person of the year.

----------

Don't forget that the profit shifting countermeasures are starting to shape up globally this year.

Who cares?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.