PDA

View Full Version : Time Magazine



DixieJeeper
12-15-2011, 01:21 PM
Time magazine named the "protester" as person of the year... and you thought it was bad when they named Osma Bin Laden person of the year. Certainly the "arab spring" of revolt may or may not have positive outcomes- my thought it is just tyrant replacment, and here al the occupy movement does aggrivate the base they are trying to reach out to or 'protect' the 99% by snarling traffic and closing ports. All the while the "1%" they claim are all evil barely notice a hiccup if the ports close for one day. What a joke.

Doty152
12-15-2011, 05:16 PM
All the "Occupy" movement is, is a bunch of self entitled, stuck up, pretentious bastards that want the world handed to them. **** them.

SirFuego
12-15-2011, 07:31 PM
Didn't they also call the iPhone the best "invention" of the year one year? The iPhone is far from what one would call an "invention". The light bulb was an invention. The transistor was an invention. The iPhone was just an improvement on an already invented line of "machines".

They just probably do it to get press and people talking about the magazine since "print" magazines are dying.

FWIW, don't forget the Tea Party played a big "protester" role in the past year, too. They are ironically the exact opposite of the Occupy movement....

DixieJeeper
12-15-2011, 10:45 PM
Yep- certainly there are some movements in the recent past and those of by gone era's that started as grass movment 'protests' that ended up to be forces to change the world, Boston tea party, first contential congress, civil rights movement most notably MLK, woman's suferage, etc. etc.

As the previous Occupy thread- they protested and did nothing, no evolution, no movment, now they protest becuase their protest camps are getting knocked down. I have yet to see one (I am sure there is one) intellegent interview of any protester. The closest was this AM on Fox and Friends a blonde girl I believe in Portland- who oddly didn't look like a hippy, non-bathing, pot smoking, hemp necklance wearing, berkinstock wearing, crunchy garnola chick.... said the protests were a form of expresion against an abstract, that change in democracy is slow, inefficent, and not perfect and she just wanted people to stop and question.

DMG
01-04-2012, 12:42 PM
I may be stating the obvious here but I don't think Time intends a positive connotation when they bestow that award. I think they are referring to the impact the recipient has had on the world.

Deadman 94 xj
01-04-2012, 01:01 PM
^ This. Its based on impact, not necessarily good or bad.

DixieJeeper
01-04-2012, 01:23 PM
yea- just like when osma bin dead for a while now was on the cover... in my opnion its just irresponsible muckracking journalism focusing on the sensational, with a "what bleeds leads" story mentality. I m sure there are plenty of people that made impacts in their own way that are more positive than social disorder and protest. But then again that's why I don't buy their rag and their ciruclation #' are down.

SirFuego
01-04-2012, 01:48 PM
But then again that's why...their ciruclation #' are down.
I think the Internet has a lot more to do with that than sensationalist articles. Some of the top "news" websites post a LOT of sensationalist articles with misleading headlines -- in fact they are probably far worse than respected magazines such as Time.

Print magazines are a dying breed -- why pay for a subscription when I can get similar information for free online? Why wait a week or month for information that is available immediately? Print still appeals to the older generation or poorer demographics since they are traditionally not as open to or exposed to technology. Younger generations have always embraced new technology, but it's quickly growing to where those in their 50s and 60s are more comfortable with it and embrace it. Technology is becoming more and more accessible to poorer demographics as well. So I really don't see the top magazines lasting for more than 10-20 more years (if that) in print format.

DixieJeeper
01-04-2012, 05:33 PM
I embrace new tech. but I perfer the old crumple up hold in your hand hard print, whether it is a magazine or a book. The only print media I never enjoyed was the newspaper. I perfer to get the "newspaper" local news on their website. I always found folding and unfolding 1/4 folding a newspaper to read cumbersome.

However, with the "dying" off of the print media and older print journeymen and women, there has been an art dying as well- that of actual journalism. Any dweeb with a roach clip and a bad hair cut can be a "web journalist" and post thier" trash journalism on thier blog.

Certainly, there are crediable bloggers just as their are poor print journalist. My gripe with any form isn't their bias as I was taught and beleive while you read anything, you read for context, understanding/compreshension, and author bias- my gripe is very few of anyone in the media is a journalist. To me a journalist is somone who asks constructive questions, digs deeper, and reports the facts they find- not only the facts they wish to support their own agenda. I understand any one media outlet might be biased one way or another by the preailing attitude of thier personel and ownership. However, just as I expect professionalism in other trades, I expect true journalist to report facts and let me decided on the implications. I do not need them orating a thesis of persausion to me on the current events.

Off my soapbox now. :)