Time's Person of the Year honor goes to 'the Ebola fighters,' not Apple CEO Tim Cook

Posted:
in General Discussion edited December 2014
Apple's chief executive was among those spurned by Time Magazine on Wednesday as the publication announced that the 2014 Person of the Year edition will not feature a single person, but instead pay homage to the healthcare workers fighting Ebola in Africa.




"Ebola is a war, and a warning," Time editor Nancy Gibbs wrote of the selection. "The global health system is nowhere close to strong enough to keep us safe from infectious disease, and 'us' means everyone, not just those in faraway places where this is one threat among many that claim lives every day. The rest of the world can sleep at night because a group of men and women are willing to stand and fight."

Joining Cook on the shortlist were Alibaba CEO Jack Ma, Russian President Vladmir Putin, pop star Taylor Swift, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, acting President of the Iraqi Kurdistan Region Masoud Barzani. The protesters in Ferguson, Mo. were also considered as a group alongside Ebola workers.

It is the second time Cook has been considered for the honor, only to be ultimately passed over. He was named a runner up in 2012, when President Barack Obama won.

"Everyone wondered whether he could live up to Steve Jobs's legacy at Apple of reinventing whole categories regularly," Gibbs said of Cook's inclusion earlier this week. "With the Apple Watch, we think he stands a good chance of doing that."
«1345

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 89

    It sounds like a death metal tribute band to a certain other group...

  • Reply 2 of 89
    I think Time have made a good decision this year. All too often they pick someone incredibly controversial just to increase their sales, but the people who've been putting their own lives at risk to save others are worthy of praise like this.
  • Reply 3 of 89
    Amen!
  • Reply 4 of 89
    Doh! I never considered they would have multiple magazine covers to help push more copies.
  • Reply 5 of 89
    Originally Posted by SolipsismY View Post

    I never considered they would have multiple magazine covers to help push more copies.

  • Reply 6 of 89
    mpantonempantone Posts: 1,609member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismY View Post



    Doh! I never considered they would have multiple magazine covers to help push more copies.



    Other magazines have done this before. 

     

    Probably Playboy, maybe the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue.

     

    Not a new concept in periodical publishing.

  • Reply 7 of 89
    thttht Posts: 4,029member

    Excellent choice by Time.

  • Reply 8 of 89
    rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    A sensible decision. I'm shocked!
  • Reply 9 of 89
    dewmedewme Posts: 3,808member

    An appropriate choice.

     

    Maybe this is a sign that the endless and vicarious infatuation with celebrities and wealth will wane. Probably not, but one can hope.

  • Reply 10 of 89
    malaxmalax Posts: 1,598member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by THT View Post

     

    Excellent choice by Time.


    Agreed.  But AI characterizing this as Cook being "spurned" is absurd.  Oftentimes the person of the year is news-making tyrant (e.g., Hitler and Stalin (twice)).  It's not a popularity contest.

  • Reply 11 of 89

    And why would Tim Cook get the person of the year title?  He hasn't done anything that isn't expected out of a quality CEO.  

  • Reply 12 of 89

    Good choice, but let's also recognize the needless panic and public health costs created by a subset of the self-righteous ones (and their teary-eyed supporters) bringing the virus back to their home countries.

  • Reply 13 of 89

    I'm really confused how this was deemed important enough. It was inflated by the media to distract people for a few months, and now it's a non-issue again.

  • Reply 14 of 89
    malaxmalax Posts: 1,598member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ghostface147 View Post

     

    And why would Tim Cook get the person of the year title?  He hasn't done anything that isn't expected out of a quality CEO.


    Well, Bezos and Facebook guy were each Person of the Year once, so being the CEO of a successful, disruptive tech company is sufficient (ok they were also the founder, and Cook isn't).  But of course the real reason he made the short list this year was his "coming out."  Gay marriage was a fairly big story this year, so Time could have linked those things together to make the case.  But Ebola has been a biggest story by far, so this makes more sense.

  • Reply 15 of 89
    Good choice, but let's also recognize the needless panic and public health costs created by a subset of the self-righteous ones (and their teary-eyed supporters) bringing the virus back to their home countries.

    Self-righteous - surely you jest.
  • Reply 16 of 89
    malaxmalax Posts: 1,598member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TheWhiteFalcon View Post

     

    I'm really confused how this was deemed important enough. It was inflated by the media to distract people for a few months, and now it's a non-issue again.


    If it bleeds it leads.  Who cares if more people die from the flu (and almost anything else you can think of, at least in the US).

  • Reply 17 of 89
    gqbgqb Posts: 1,934member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

     

    Good choice, but let's also recognize the needless panic and public health costs created by a subset of the self-righteous ones (and their teary-eyed supporters) bringing the virus back to their home countries.


    Not to mention endless media stoked "needless panic" that (hmmmm) completely stopped the day after the election.

  • Reply 18 of 89
    Why on earth should it have gone to Tim Cook? Announcing a watch is hardly more important than fighting an incredibly lethal epidemic.
  • Reply 19 of 89
    Headlines on parade!
  • Reply 20 of 89
    "spurned"? really? i think the author of the article needs to break out that dictionary.

    the decision was a perfectly fine one and i think tim would agree.
Sign In or Register to comment.