Why Steve Jobs will again not be named Time Magazine’s Person of the Year

“Google’s Marissa Mayer thinks Steve Jobs should be Time’s Person of the Year. So, apparently, do the nearly 11,000 readers who, as of Monday morning, had voted for Apple’s CEO on Time’s website,” Philip Elmer-DeWitt reports for Fortune.

“But readers don’t choose the winner. If they did, Recep Tayyip Erdogan would be this year’s POY, and I can pretty much guarantee that’s not going to happen,” P.E.D. reports. “No, this is a decision made by Time’s reporters, writers and editors in a series of meetings that get smaller and smaller until finally the managing editor and editor-in-chief sign off on it.”

P.E.D. reports, “Steve Jobs may be on the list of candidates the editors are considering, and he may even end up on their “people who mattered” list, but he won’t be Time’s Person of the Year. It’s not because he hasn’t earned it.”

Full article here.


  1. In an unrelated note, Time magazine will again not be named as Apple’s Magazine of the year. Neither will Windows & .NET Magazine since they won that title last year.

  2. Time’s “Man/Person of the Year” has pissed me off for a long time. The title was never meant to be an award. It is not supposed to be an “honor” to be named “Man of the Year”. The title was supposed to be given to whatever individual had the biggest influence on the world in the ending year, for good or ill.

    Examples of people who were named “Man of the Year” for negative reasons:
    — Adolf Hitler
    — George H.W. Bush (he was given the title “Men of the Year” for his brilliant foreign policy and his horrible domestic policy)
    — Newt Gingrich, for the ill-fated government shutdown gambit and engineering Clinton’s impeachment.

    But somewhere along the line, the ignorant public got it into their heads that “Person of the Year” was an award. So when Time made the only rational choice in 2001, Osama Bin-Laden, the public went nuts. How dare they give the murderous Bin-Laden this great “honor”.

    And Time caved.

    Since then, the “Person of the Year” has been utterly meaningless, a choice designed to be as politically inoffensive as possible.


  3. Thanks for elevating the discussion by injecting Bush and Hitler in the discussion. There is z working theory for that, the name escapes me. But I know what the theory says, and you lose Lord! Unbelievable that it only took 5-posts.

  4. who care? he is not the only guy who would be. there are a lot of people in the world who better than steve. actually, in terms of helping people or contributing on something good for public like what Gate has done, he did nothing. he thinks only his damn company. yeah, he is very revolutionary. but I don’t think that he is a person who deserved to be. forget about him. I hate something Apple nowadays. it’s too much already.

  5. The “Person” of the Year should be the secret money that has flowed into political campaigns ever since the Supreme Court allowed underground funding of politicians.

    Pathetic when you value Democracy, but money talks – loudly in this past election.

    So make this year’s Persson a Shadow, or a mannequin built from various currencies from around the world.

  6. Would you care to talk about the foreign money Obama got during his 2008 campaign? Or do you prefer to just spew a bunch of talking points you read in the Huffington Post like a good mindless sheep?


  7. I cancelled my subscription a few years ago (after about 15 years) as Time just became more and more irrelevant. I used to read their movie ratings to see which ones they panned (you could rely on the fact that they were generally great ones that I wanted to see).
    Sad to see a once great magazine slide into the toilet like that…

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.