 |
| Scarlet
Letters |
| Travesty
of the Year |
|
|
"This
business of giving people what they want is a dope pusher's argument. News
is something people don't know they're interested in until they hear about
it."
--
Reuven Frank, former president of NBC News, 1998 |
|
I was going to do a Christmas column this week. I meant to - it's
become a tradition for me to reflect on the winter holidays and  the
traditions, both good and ill, that we have created for the last month
of the year.
But I can't do that this year. My profession has been handed a disturbing
blow this Christmas Eve, and since I have to be at work on the holiday,
allow me to be a Grinch and turn the subject away from Christmas to something
as trivial, yet overwhelming, as a magazine's front cover.
TIME Magazine has named Rudy Giuliani their Person of the Year.
My dismay has nothing to do with my opinion of Hizzoner. Giuliani has a
spotty record on civil rights and the Constitution, but he undeniably stepped
up to the plate and led New York through its worst crisis.
The problem is that Person of the Year has never been meant as an honor.
It is a reflection on the events of the year, and names the person who
has changed the lives of people all over the world the most, for good or
for ill. That person is undoubtedly Osama bin Laden, TIME Magazine's leading
contender until a few days ago.
I can
only imagine the outcry if TIME had named bin Laden, due to the ongoing
misconception of the Person of the Year choice. But consider:
• In 1938, TIME named Adolf Hitler Person of the Year. The cover featured
Hitler playing an organ decorated with human corpses (imagine trying to
get away with THAT today!). Granted, this was before the real horrors of
World War II began, but already Hitler had invaded Austria and Czechoslovakia.
• The next year, TIME named Joseph Stalin, right around the time he formed
a nonaggression pact with Hitler. The 1930s were a lot of fun, weren't
they? Stalin would appear again in 1942, by the way.
• Another controversial choice: Nikita Krushchev in 1957. I can only imagine
what Cold War Americans, filled with Communist paranoia, must have said.
Mikhail Gorbechev and other Russian leaders have often been named Person
of the Year, as the wranglings of
• In 1979, it was the Ayatullah Khomeini, who received the "honor" for
taking American citizens hostage and requiring, among the terms of their
release, that the U.S. depose President Carter and elect someone more to
Khomeini's liking.
• In 1950, the Person of the Year was generic: The American G.I., presumably
for World War II and Korea. Other generic choices have been the Hungarian
Freedom Fighter in 1956, U.S. Scientists in 1960, The 25-and-Under Generation
in 1966, The Middle Americans in 1969, American Women in 1975.
• Other times, Person of the Year has been chosen not because of his or
her own accomplishments, but as a representative of a trend. Jeff Bezos
of Amazon.com was chosen in 1999 to represent e-commerce. AIDS researcher
Dr. David Ho was chosen in 1996 to represent the worldwide fight against
the disease.
• The first nonperson Person of the Year was the computer, in 1982. Who
can argue that the advent of the personal computer has NOT changed our
lives, for better or for worse? In 1988, at the height of the environmental
movement, it was Endangered Planet Earth, hilariously named Planet of the
Year (does that mean next year it's Jupiter's turn?).
• By the way, despite naming several women as Woman of the Year, from Queen
Elizabeth II to Phillippine president Corazon Aquino, it has remained the
Man of the Year contest until, believe it or not, 1999, when it suddenly
became Person of the Year.
Overall, since Charles Lindbergh became the first Man of the Year in 1927
for his trans-Atlantic flight, there have been four of America's "great
Satans" to be named Person of the Year. There have been 24 other international
Persons, 15 American presidents and politicans, and 19 influential Americans
to be named, not including multiple appearances or the generic nominations.
America stopped caring about what was happening overseas, but TIME made
sure we never forgot that news has a way of crossing oceans.
These people include Mohandas Ghandi and Henry Kissinger, Zeng Xiao-ping
and Ted Turner, Charles DeGaulle and Pope John XXIII. These are men and
women, generations and professions that have changed the way our world
works, who have affected the lives of every human being on the planet,
with the possible exception of Santa's elves (see, I found a way to work
Christmas in).
You cannot make that argument for Giuliani. He has deeply affected the
lives of New Yorkers, and his example has fired the hearts of many Americans.
But there is no argument that Osama bin Laden has had a much deeper effect
on the entire world. The repercussions of his actions will echo through
history in much the same way that Hitler's actions in 1938 echo through
today.
In their own admission, TIME makes controversial choices. Consider what
appears on their website, next to photos of Hitler and Stalin: "Remembering
that the criterion is the person or thing that had the greatest impact
on the news for good or ill, it's undeniable that these leaders were the
only possible choices for their respective years."
Journalism is not about telling people what they want to know. That's the
coward's way out, the sound-bite, cut-to-commercial, tune-in-for-exclusive-interviews-with-the-quarterback
style of news we've all become accustomed to in recent years. TIME has
always known that, never flinching from making difficult choices, telling
us what we need to know, not necessarily what we want to hear.
"Though we spent hours debating the pros and cons of naming Osama bin Laden,
it ultimately became easy to dismiss him," said TIME managing editor Jim
Kelly. "He is not a larger-than-life figure with broad historical sweep
... he is smaller than life, a garden-variety terrorist whose evil plan
succeeded beyond his highest hopes."
This is utter nonsense, and Kelly knows it. Man of the Year doesn't have
to be a larger-than-life figure - he is supposed to be the one who changed
our lives.
Giuliani deserves honors. Man of the Year isn't it. The man who changed
our lives forever is Osama bin Laden, whether Joe Six-Pack likes it or
not. It is not congratulating him to acknowledge his effect, and pretending
otherwise because "it means he wins" is ridiculous.
At a time when journalism itself is under attack, when governments are
slamming shut the doors of public information that have taken decades to
open, when photographers are forced to destroy photos "to protect the families"
and freelance journalists are jailed for six months for refusing to become
government spies, it is the worst time in history for a magazine like TIME
to roll over and play dead.
By choosing the popular, heartwarming choice over the cold facts, TIME
has reduced the only meaningful year-in-review left in American journalism
to yet another Chamber-of-Commerce popularity contest. |
|
| The factsreferenced in this article were
found on TIME.com and CNN.com. |
|
|
|
|
