Time magazine article trying to justify naming Hitler person of the year in 1938.

[sarcasmo]

"now Person of the Year — was not an honor but instead should be a distinction applied to the newsmaker who most influenced world events for better or worse. In case that second criterion was lost on readers, the issue that named Hitler dispensed with the portrait treatment that cover subjects typically got. Instead he was depicted as a tiny figure with his back to the viewer, playing a massive organ with his murdered victims spinning on a St. Catherine’s wheel."



https://time.com/5573720/hitler-world-influence/

[Girard442]

1. It was inevitable, I suppose, that POTY would evolve into an Attaboy.

I liked the original concept better.

[unblock]

2. Also Stalin, Faisal, khomeini....

The problem is people just can't get the concept that it's just a non-judgmental distinction rather than an honor or an endorsement when it's call "person of the year".

It just sounds like so many other "... of the year" honors given out by other organizations so they just assume the same criteria apply.

I have no problem with the designation of hitler fir 1938, he certainly changed the news for better or for worse.

The problem is terminology. They'd be better off finding something that doesn't sound like an award. Better yet, do away with the title altogether. It's unnecessary. Just call it the "news year in review" issue, and put the biggest newsmaker on the cover. They don't have titles for anyone else on any other cover, why this one?

[ms liberty]

4. This. n/t