
Vote Now: Who Should Be Time's Person of the Year? Edward Snowden - ghosh
http://poy.time.com/2013/11/25/vote-now-who-should-be-times-person-of-the-year/slide/edward-snowden/
======
lignuist
Poll 2010:

[http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,288...](http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2028734_2029036_2029037,00.html)

And then it became:

[http://content.time.com/time/person-of-the-
year/2010/](http://content.time.com/time/person-of-the-year/2010/)

So probably this year it will be Miley Cyrus...

~~~
beaker52
Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan got a lot of positive votes. I
imagine he doesn't have same support after Gezi.

~~~
stevoo
How does Erdogan deserve to be the times person of the year. With everything
that is happening in Turkey and all the countries that it defies and steps
over. He shouldn't event be on the list !

~~~
beaker52
I guess they're trying to be objective, "Boston Bombers" Dzhokhar and Tamerlan
Tsarnaev are on the list.

~~~
Tloewald
Person (previously "Man") of the year has never been a moral judgment. Hitler
was "man of the year" in 1936. It's a question of who had the most impact --
for good or ill.

~~~
selmnoo
> Person (previously "Man") of the year has never been a moral judgment.
> Hitler was "man of the year" in 1936.

Well, originally. But now? No, absolutely not. See recent persons of the year
(of the past few decades):
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Person_of_the_Year#Persons...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Person_of_the_Year#Persons_of_the_Year)

There's a connotation of greatness in the phrase 'person of the year', that's
there whether you like it or not, and Time magazine is certainly not going to
get itself in rough waters by nominating a controversial figure and then
substantiating a pick by the reason you cite -- that it's a person who had the
most impact. If that really were true, Guiliani wouldn't have been picked as
the POY, Osama would have, Zuck wouldn't have been picked, Assange would have.

But all of this aside, what I want to say most is that Time magazine is just a
_terrible_ tabloid at this point that's only been getting more terrible with
each passing year. It's designed to appeal to the LCD audience, it's filled
with FUD full up their necks. See this recent cover for example:
[http://img.timeinc.net/time/daily/2013/1310/360_cover_1111.j...](http://img.timeinc.net/time/daily/2013/1310/360_cover_1111.jpg)

I really hope we all start ignoring Time soon.

------
baby
I'm wondering why some people are on the list, like Miley Cyrus or the guy
behind Netflix. If those are, why not others? I'd personally vote for the head
of Naughty Dog and The Last of Us over Netflix.

PS: thinking about it, I'd vote for Satoshi. We should do a HN POY.

PS2 : done!
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6800515](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6800515)

~~~
martincmartin
"Person of the Year" is really "Newsmaker of the Year." It's not an
endorsement, just a recognition that they made the most news. Hitler was
TIME's "Man of the Year" in 1938.

~~~
user24
> Hitler was TIME's "Man of the Year" in 1938.

\- after the Munich Agreement wherein Hitler agreed peace with Chamberlain. Ok
he reneged, but that's not the point.

~~~
martincmartin
> Ok he reneged, but that's not the point.

The article isn't celebrating peace, it's very negative about Hitler. The
cover for that issue shows people being tortured.

Edit: you can read it here.

[http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,760539,...](http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,760539,00.html)

~~~
opinali
Yeah, old times when the press had balls. Good luck hoping Time will pick
Snowden these days.

------
kolbe
This is one of the more disheartening polls I've seen. It speaks to a new,
disturbing dynamic in our social order where people do not defend their
beliefs with any sort of force or passion.

I had no clue so many people shared in my belief that Snowden has done
something great. I figured the media had corrupted most of the people into
thinking he'd done something deplorable, because no one has been taking to the
streets or to the polls or to the anything to demand changes based on his
revelations.

Past generations would have, but that's not the case today. We think he's
great. We just don't care to actually support him.

Historically, I feel like there was a notion that someone was "too popular to
execute." But, even though the vast majority appear to support Snowden so much
that they declare him POY, I don't think we'd do a thing if the US raided his
home in Russia and put a bullet in him. We'd be mad, and we'd write blog posts
about it, and maybe some people would DDoS attack a website or send a bunch of
pizzas to John Kerry, but there would be no political turnover. There would be
no justice on Snowden's behalf. At best, it would be like Guantanamo, where
some new POTUS candidate promises change so we elect him, then does absolutely
nothing. And we'd happily just not care.

~~~
pmorici
If you rely on Internet polls to deduce what the sentiment of the country is
then Snowden is an American hero, Ron Paul should be president, and there
would be no more software patents.

That is to say that Internet polls grossly over represent certain minority
beliefs.

~~~
TillE
Actual polls show a slight majority in favor of Snowden, despite the barrage
of whining and accusations from politicians and cable news.

------
thesadman
Ugh, do people still waste their time with TIME magazine and their "storied"
polls? Sorry, but it is the equivalent of a tabloid because for the last 10
years the quality of articles have been continuously dropping. To see it
linked here on HN is unfortunate. Lets spend our time on more interesting
topics.

~~~
aaron695
The masses read the tabloids, if they are not on your side then you're the
minority.

Which leaves you with the only other options put up with the status quo or
leave.

Until we get our seasteading going the tabloids are very important.

~~~
ethana
Correction: The mass of baby boomers who still have subscription ;)

Although in TIME's defense, their POY is still better than the Nobel _Peace_
Prize.

------
imaginator
Poll results: [http://poy.time.com/2013/11/25/vote-now-who-should-be-
times-...](http://poy.time.com/2013/11/25/vote-now-who-should-be-times-person-
of-the-year/slide/poll-results/)

~~~
repsilat
Strange looking list. On my browser Rand Paul's name is truncated to "RAND
PAU.." (ironically all such truncated names are cut off at the last letter,
making them all _longer_ ). Many longer names are not truncated, though:
"RECEP TAYYIP ERDOĞAN", "DZHOKHAR AND TAMERLAN TSARNAEV". Several names end
with full-stops, too: "MALALA YOUSAFZA." is one.

I wonder if it is a secret message.

------
brokenparser
Poll requires Facebook

0/10 would not vote again

~~~
repsilat
Probably because of /b/'s vote manipulation in previous years. Another reason
we "can't have nice things" on the internet -- systems that rely on implicit
codes of civility still seem to break down when people can remain anonymous.

~~~
alcari
/b/'s vote manipulation lead to the selection of moot as most influential
person, which is clearly correct, as moot's users influenced the voting
process to ensure it.

~~~
rtpg
except the award isn't "who is the most influential person on the internet",
it's supposed to be "the most influential person of the year on the planet".

It's like when you cite raw polling results from the Daily Kos, and say its
representative of American opinion. There's a lot of bias that needs to be
taken into account.

------
benmarks
"Authorize Poptip to use your account?

"This application will be able to: * Read Tweets from your timeline. * See who
you follow, and follow new people. * Update your profile. * Post Tweets for
you."

The hell.

~~~
drcube
I stopped trying to vote after enabling the 20th third-party script on that
page and the poll still didn't work.

------
user24
Are these polls typically good indicators of TIME's official choice? Or is
this going to be a way of making Snowden "the people's POY" without TIME
officially making it so?

------
chollida1
Can't vote as I have to login with Twitter or Facebook to vote.

Why?

~~~
Jgrubb
It throws that up after you vote, presumably to make you broadcast this very
important poll to the universe of rapt followers we all have. I didn't get the
impression you actually have to do that to vote, though, since it pops up
afterward. It at least gave me the impression that I voted even though I
dismissed it.

~~~
Thrymr
The popup says "Please log in to ensure your vote is counted."

The Twitter auth also includes the ability to post tweets for you, although
the popup says "We won’t post anything without your permission." Didn't I just
give them permission if I authorize them to use my account? No thanks.

~~~
gk1
Twitter > Settings > Apps > Revoke Access

You can just do that right after you vote.

~~~
Thrymr
Yeah, fuck that. Voting in a meaningless online poll isn't important enough
for me to grant unlimited access to anyone, for however short a time.

------
beaker52
Government: Snowden is a terrorist.

People: Snowden is a hero.

What a great way to bring this difference of opinion to the fore.

~~~
dagw
Person of the year is the person considered to have had the most significant
influence on the world, but not necessarily for the better. It's an
acknowledgment of their significance, not an endorsement of their actions.
Previous winners include Hitler, Stalin and Ayatullah Khomeini.

No matter where someone falls on the Snoweden-is-a-terrorist/Snowden-is-a-hero
scale, they can all agree that his actions greatly influenced the current
poltical narrative, and stands a good chance of changing the world (for better
or worse depending on which side of the debate you stand on) as we move
forward.

~~~
lmm
> Person of the year is the person considered to have had the most significant
> influence on the world, but not necessarily for the better. It's an
> acknowledgment of their significance, not an endorsement of their actions.
> Previous winners include Hitler, Stalin and Ayatullah Khomeini.

IIRC those were all Man of the Year. TIME's choices in more recent years have
been far more wimpy (e.g. Osama Bin Laden was snubbed in 2001); while their
stated aim is to pick the most significant (for good or ill) person, I no
longer have any faith that they will do so.

------
ChrisArchitect
Putin is a good one but I feel like he wasn't a top newsmaker this year, and
further that he will most likely be a newsmaker next year (look at current
happenings in Ukraine, continued things like that, and then the mother of all
craziness that's going to be Sochi Olympics)

Snowden seems like the best bet for sheer impact/newsmaker. Tho I'm not sure
how 'international' TIME is these days, and perhaps Snowden is only really
know in the West.

------
trekky1700
I'd nominate Bill Gates, he's done more in the past year to support and make
actual change and improve the world than anyone on the list. Then again, not
exactly newsworthy.

------
beaker52
2012: Anonymous got peoples vote, but Obama was chosen.

------
mkohlmyr
[http://i.imgur.com/jv9t4X0.png](http://i.imgur.com/jv9t4X0.png)

I'd say those numbers sound about right...

------
beshrkayali
I may not be correct, but Edward said specifically at the beginning of all of
this: Please don't make this about me! Correct?

~~~
brdrak
Didn't he also say somewhere that we'll be reading about him in history books?

------
knodi
I don't think Edward Snowden should be person of the year. Not because I don't
think he did something important because he did. I truly think what he did was
the right thing. But he needs to stand trial in the US so the we the people
can see how extreme our government has become.

He needs to be like batman, sacrifice his mind, body and freedom for a cause
that people will remember him for.

But he's in Russia and he's never coming back to the US so this will be a on
going thing for years even decades where no one but few people will remember
him and our blight.

~~~
3JPLW
Why do you think that excludes him from being the person of the year? I don't
think those two things are mutually exclusive.

------
rdl
I don't see how this is even a question capable of admitting debate (although
maybe Poitras and Greenwald could get in.)

------
ck2
As much as I appreciate Edward Snowden and what he did, Malala Yousafzai
deserves even more attention for her deeds.

~~~
oddx
It is not about deserves or don't, it's about influence. Yousafzai influence
to the World is negligible in comparison to Snowden.

------
Tosh108
The numbers are completely different from this afternoon, seems like some
people are hacking the votes for fun: [http://www.dailydot.com/news/time-
person-of-the-year-miley-c...](http://www.dailydot.com/news/time-person-of-
the-year-miley-cyrus-rigged/)

------
avisk
The irony is to vote for Snowden,I need to login using Facebook or twitter :),
so that time.com can track me.

------
Hovertruck
Thanks for the helpful error message, Time.

    
    
       Error (api.go:209) forerunner/api.getPollById: exception: can't connect to new replica set master [ec2-54-225-59-0.compute-1.amazonaws.com:27017], err: couldn't connect to server ec2-54-225-59-0.compute-1.amazonaws.com:27017

------
mydpy
Miley Cyrus has more votes than Edward Snowden. How can that be?

~~~
DanBC
Is that an honest question?

You realise that almost no-one gives a fuck about Snowden, right? Most people
really just don't care.

The Guardian newspaper has (if we're generous) a circulation of 250,000
people.

The (untrustworthy) numbers of the MileyCyrusVEVO "Wrecking Ball" video are
352,117,848 views.

~~~
JackpotDen
> 352,117,848 views.

Now I'm depressed.

------
wehadfun
Wonder how Zimmerman and Travon Martin did not get on this list.

------
Kiro
I voted Lebron James.

------
bcRIPster
...and provide Time marketing info by giving them access to your Facebook
data. Not happening, thank-you very much.

------
jotm
Voted (with my "fake" FB account cause I don't have a real one).

------
esamek
Chrome won't let me vote..throwing shitloads of errors in the console.

GPT LOADED EVENT LISTENER EXECUTED load listener, textContent GPT LOADED
Blocked a frame with origin "[http://poy.time.com"](http://poy.time.com") from
accessing a frame with origin
"[http://tags.bluekai.com"](http://tags.bluekai.com"). Protocols, domains, and
ports must match. GPT LOADED EVENT LISTENER EXECUTED load listener,
textContent Blocked a frame with origin
"[http://googleads.g.doubleclick.net"](http://googleads.g.doubleclick.net")
from accessing a frame with origin
"[http://poy.time.com"](http://poy.time.com"). Protocols, domains, and ports
must match. EVENT LISTENER EXECUTED old height: old width: scroll height: 55
scroll width: 275 new height: new width: Blocked a frame with origin
"[http://poy.time.com"](http://poy.time.com") from accessing a frame with
origin "[http://tags.bluekai.com"](http://tags.bluekai.com"). Protocols,
domains, and ports must match. Uncaught SecurityError: An attempt was made to
break through the security policy of the user agent.
93c0d7430d30e77dc6a5f0275dfcb679.js:48 Uncaught TypeError: Object #<Page> has
no method 'init' 528c2242c903451bee0013d3:81 2 Blocked a frame with origin
"[http://poy.time.com"](http://poy.time.com") from accessing a frame with
origin "[http://tags.bluekai.com"](http://tags.bluekai.com"). Protocols,
domains, and ports must match. Invalid App Id: Must be a number or numeric
string representing the application id. all.js:56 The "fb-root" div has not
been created, auto-creating all.js:56 FB.getLoginStatus() called before
calling FB.init(). all.js:56 2 Blocked a frame with origin
"[http://poy.time.com"](http://poy.time.com") from accessing a frame with
origin "[http://tags.bluekai.com"](http://tags.bluekai.com"). Protocols,
domains, and ports must match. Posted 2 errors to errorception.com
50eb3228903069e001000036.js:1 2 Blocked a frame with origin
"[http://poy.time.com"](http://poy.time.com") from accessing a frame with
origin "[http://tags.bluekai.com"](http://tags.bluekai.com"). Protocols,
domains, and ports must match.

~~~
a3n
You have access to another browser.

I don't have a facebook account.

------
Glyptodon
Their voting system provider keeps failing.

------
Nilmay
The future PM CANDIDATE OF INDIA SHREE NARENDRA MODI JI!deserved to the time
person of the year! Cos he thoroughly deserves it!

~~~
thesadman
I think Modi seems like a no-nonsense forward thinking anti-corruption
development oriented person. Completely unlike any of the rest of India's
nepotistic political caste. I hope for India's sake that this guy gets a shot
at trying to solve some of those problems.

------
PixelPusher
No way, I don't vote for traitors. All his US supporters are a bunch of
Benedict Arnolds.

BTW, just voted for Miley. She definitely made my year.

~~~
Numberwang
I can completely understand your position if you are an American. And I'm sure
you can understand us foreigners trying to show our appreciation for a man who
uncovered this extensive evil intrusion into our lives.

~~~
PixelPusher
Bottom line, he's a traitor. Beyond that, most of the laws that helped start
this were set into effect years ago. Where were the people crying then?

Most people complain about having their privacy taken away when using _free_
online services. All I see are a bunch of ignorant loud mouths who got angry
too late.

~~~
orik
Yeah because how dare any citizen question it's government, right?

/s

~~~
PixelPusher
Are you serious? You can question everything you want as an ordinary citizen.
The moment you sign a contract, specially for the military, you agree to keep
your word.

So, right, how dare the government hold someone to their word? You're
basically advocating lying and not honoring your promises.

BTW - I basically make a living honoring promises and contracts, otherwise we
wouldn't have customers ;)

~~~
6d0debc071
> You're basically advocating lying and not honoring your promises.

Yes, obviously. There are situations where you ought to lie. The typical
example: "Are there any Jews in your basement?"

Decency is more than keeping to the words, sometimes it even requires you
break them to keep the spirit of promise. We generally give promises
contingent on implied good behaviour from the other parties. When others break
their promises the stack built on that mutual honour collapses.

And I'm fine living in the world where that's the way people treat promises, I
massively prefer it to the world where people can be tricked into promising
something and then have to keep to it when it turns out to be abhorrent.

