TIME mag's short list of candidates for MOTY is missing the two most obvious choices

[Jackson]

Time Magazines Person of the Year isn't about the media, it's about who influenced our news. Thusly, your two choices made no sense at all. I would guess more people are more aware of Miley Cyrus than either of your choices that you listed.

The TIME website I quoted in the OP said:

"The recognition goes to the person who TIME’s editors think most influenced the news this year, for good or bad."

For the reasons I gave in the OP, Fox News or Rush Limbaugh have influenced the news more than any of the people on the list, possibly excepting Obama himself (a President always influences the news in major ways).

This year, those two had more influence on the liberals who write, slant, and disseminate most news, than anyone else. By repeatedly pointing out just how bad the various Obama administration scandals were, and not letting up in the face of attacks and abuse by the rest of the media....

.... they actually got the mainstream media to start criticizing the Obama administration, and got ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, and various other leftist outlets to say BAD things about the Obamanites.

Such a reporting trend among the liberal press is unprecedented, and in fact astounding. And it never would have happened if not for the persistent and factual reporting of Fox News and Limbaugh. Of course, those liberal outlets have since stopped reporting on the IRS, Obama's ineffectual response to Syria's use of WMDs on its own population, the coverup of Benghazi deaths of U.S. officials, the NSA, etc., and are winding down their criticism of Obamacare fast.

Nonetheless, they actually performed a little investigative reporting for a while there. And that is such a monumental change, showing such an earth-shaking "influence on the news", that the people who made it happen should be a shoe-in for the award.

Of course, that's like asking a naughty five-year-old who finally got caught with chocolate smeared over his face and his hand in the candy bowl, who was forced to go and wash up and even buy some replacement candy: "Which parent or grandparent or aunt or uncle was the most responsible for making you clean up your act? We want to give them an award!" ...and expecting them to give an honest answer.

So, sure enough, neither Limbaugh nor Fox News appears on TIME's short list of candidates.

Here is a link to all of Time Magazine's Person of the Year. Do you see anyone who was part of the media? One person who could be considered media is Mark Zuckerberg but then that would be "social media". In other words, you're 100% wrong.
Now your choices may be really important to you, but you represent a small piece of the American demographics. Time is talking about the entire US and the world! Fox News get's 8% of all the news audience in the US, Rush less than 1% of the audience. That isn't even a ripple on an undisturbed and smooth lake.
Oh and here's the link.
Time Person of the Year
Time Person of the Year - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ya think we can have just a little reality here?

Let's talk about if it would have been appropriate. How about Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward bringing down a president. They certainly would have qualified. Rather than any one person, I think Fox News would be appropriate just for the reasons Little Acorn suggested. Perhaps the owner or general manager of Fox. If nothing else, it's something to think about. Turning around those liberal networks is nothing short of a coup.

 

[kiwiman127]

The TIME website I quoted in the OP said:

"The recognition goes to the person who TIME’s editors think most influenced the news this year, for good or bad."

For the reasons I gave in the OP, Fox News or Rush Limbaugh have influenced the news more than any of the people on the list, possibly excepting Obama himself (a President always influences the news in major ways).

This year, those two had more influence on the liberals who write, slant, and disseminate most news, than anyone else. By repeatedly pointing out just how bad the various Obama administration scandals were, and not letting up in the face of attacks and abuse by the rest of the media....

.... they actually got the mainstream media to start criticizing the Obama administration, and got ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, and various other leftist outlets to say BAD things about the Obamanites.

Such a reporting trend among the liberal press is unprecedented, and in fact astounding. And it never would have happened if not for the persistent and factual reporting of Fox News and Limbaugh. Of course, those liberal outlets have since stopped reporting on the IRS, Obama's ineffectual response to Syria's use of WMDs on its own population, the coverup of Benghazi deaths of U.S. officials, the NSA, etc., and are winding down their criticism of Obamacare fast.

Nonetheless, they actually performed a little investigative reporting for a while there. And that is such a monumental change, showing such an earth-shaking "influence on the news", that the people who made it happen should be a shoe-in for the award.

Of course, that's like asking a naughty five-year-old who finally got caught with chocolate smeared over his face and his hand in the candy bowl, who was forced to go and wash up and even buy some replacement candy: "Which parent or grandparent or aunt or uncle was the most responsible for making you clean up your act? We want to give them an award!" ...and expecting them to give an honest answer.

So, sure enough, neither Limbaugh nor Fox News appears on TIME's short list of candidates.

Here is a link to all of Time Magazine's Person of the Year. Do you see anyone who was part of the media? One person who could be considered media is Mark Zuckerberg but then that would be "social media". In other words, you're 100% wrong.
Now your choices may be really important to you, but you represent a small piece of the American demographics. Time is talking about the entire US and the world! Fox News get's 8% of all the news audience in the US, Rush less than 1% of the audience. That isn't even a ripple on an undisturbed and smooth lake.
Oh and here's the link.
Time Person of the Year
Time Person of the Year - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ya think we can have just a little reality here?

Let's talk about if it would have been appropriate. How about Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward bringing down a president. They certainly would have qualified. Rather than any one person, I think Fox News would be appropriate just for the reasons Little Acorn suggested. Perhaps the owner or general manager of Fox. If nothing else, it's something to think about. Turning around those liberal networks is nothing short of a coup.

8% of news viewers watch Fox News. Keep in mind there's many people who don't watch the news at all. So your probably talking about less than 5% of American alone! And then your talking about ideological information wars which interests even fewer Americans/the rest of the world. Now were probably down to 2%, maybe? That's hardly enough to be considered against even Miley Cyrus.
I can't believe I'm debating this thread.

 

[Pogo]

Yes. The OP talked about media personnel, but the official Times's short list are the people I have listed. At least that's how I understood it when I glanced at it. I didn't totally read it, I admit. Did I miss something?

Time Magazines Person of the Year isn't about the media, it's about who influenced our news. Thusly, your two choices made no sense at all. I would guess more people are more aware of Miley Cyrus than either of your choices that you listed.

No, but Fox news, theme of 'fair and balanced', and market share did have an impact on the liberal slanted networks where the 'whole story' wasn't being told. Viewers were tuning into Fox to find out 'the facts of the case" and just what stories were out there that weren't being told by the other stations. The OP made the case that was true. I urge you to go back and read it. It was very good.

You're easily impressed by specious argument methinks.

First of all, ratings have nothing to do with credibility or "fair and balanced" or any of that crap. They have to do with attention. Which is why fake wrestling and paternity tests and people forced to eat bugs on an island get ratings and exist as TV shows.

Second, the OP leans on two majorly specious assumptions: (1) the old canard that corporate mass media is "liberal" (the old 'work the refs' BS) and (2) that Fox Noise and Lush Rimjob influence the rest of that corporate media. Both are on shaky ground that has more to do with wishful thinking than any reality.

The OP is based on two grans ASS-umptions of his own concoction, nothing more substantial than that.

I thought you were being sarcastic at first about this.

 

[Little-Acorn]

8% of news viewers watch Fox News. Keep in mind there's many people who don't watch the news at all. So your probably talking about less than 5% of American alone! And then your talking about ideological information wars which interests even fewer Americans/the rest of the world. Now were probably down to 2%, maybe? That's hardly enough to be considered against even Miley Cyrus.

I can't believe I'm debating this thread.

You aren't. You're trying to avoid the most significant part of the OP, which is that Limbaugh and Fox News caused ALL THE OTHER OUTLETS to change their agenda and start investigating and criticizing the Obama administration and other far-left groups.

But that's OK. Every time you try to dodge or change the subject like this, it just gives honest people another opportunity to get right back to the subject and point out the truth about what happened.

So, keep up the good work!

In fact, Fox News and Rush Limbaugh did more to influence the news this last year, than any of the people on TIME's list. You won't find TIME admitting it, though.

 

[blackhawk]

How did Anthony Weiner not make the list? In any event here is my choice.

Ernie? Seriously?

Anthony Weiner's "news" affected nobody but Anthony Weiner, that's why.

When it comes to Time or any other magazines person of the year trust me I take none of it serious.

 

[Pogo]

8% of news viewers watch Fox News. Keep in mind there's many people who don't watch the news at all. So your probably talking about less than 5% of American alone! And then your talking about ideological information wars which interests even fewer Americans/the rest of the world. Now were probably down to 2%, maybe? That's hardly enough to be considered against even Miley Cyrus.

I can't believe I'm debating this thread.

You aren't. You're trying to avoid the most significant part of the OP, which is that Limbaugh and Fox News caused ALL THE OTHER OUTLETS to change their agenda and start investigating and criticizing the Obama administration and other far-left groups.

Feel free to actually substantiate that wishful theory beyond ipse dixit.

 

[kiwiman127]

8% of news viewers watch Fox News. Keep in mind there's many people who don't watch the news at all. So your probably talking about less than 5% of American alone! And then your talking about ideological information wars which interests even fewer Americans/the rest of the world. Now were probably down to 2%, maybe? That's hardly enough to be considered against even Miley Cyrus.

I can't believe I'm debating this thread.

You aren't. You're trying to avoid the most significant part of the OP, which is that Limbaugh and Fox News caused ALL THE OTHER OUTLETS to change their agenda and start investigating and criticizing the Obama administration and other far-left groups.

But that's OK. Every time you try to dodge or change the subject like this, it just gives honest people another opportunity to get right back to the subject and point out the truth about what happened.

So, keep up the good work!

In fact, Fox News and Rush Limbaugh did more to influence the news this last year, than any of the people on TIME's list. You won't find TIME admitting it, though.

Let's see, I have provided Time's complete list which would be historical fact. I have provided numbers pertaining to the news seekers and where they get their news and that's just in the US. Time Magazine has readers world wide. So there are a couple of more facts.
All you got is an ideological opinion, nothing factual about that! And you think you have a winning OP? You're thinking small, Time is encompassing the entire the world and 100's of millions of people.
Bye, bye.

 

[whitehall]

It happens every year. The dying weekly puts a provocative face on the cover and the fools in pop-culture think it's important and buy the rag. That's how the system works.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Pope Francis is a lock.

I agree. He has turned the Catholic Church's hierarchy on its head and much to the delight of parish priests and nuns around the world. One man, in few words, has changed the conversation.

Is the Pope a Prophet of God? Since he is not he can not lead God's church on Earth. In fact until prophets were reestablished on Earth God had no man made church. Satan ran everything.

 

[Wry Catcher]

he's also a stone, cold socialist. say goodbye to the Church.

Buh-Bye, Mackerel Snappers. Have a nice trip to Purgatory...

You're a hateful moron, hence he's light years ahead of you on the scale of humanity. You have more in common with Adolph Hitler than Pope Francis, and your idea of Socialism proves once again what an ignorant ass you are.

Suck it up, buttercup. Put your big girl panties on and face the world.

And, OBTW. I have FORGOTTEN more about socialism than you will will ever know. You are just a drone, a worker ant, not even worth the time it would take to squash you out of existence.

Now head over to OFA and see what your masters have in store for you today.

douchebag

Thanks for taking the time and Thanks For Sharing.

Short, concise ^^^ and way too abstract for the hateful moron to understand.

 

[BDBoop]

Pope Francis is Time's Person of the Year.