Time Magazine Person of the Year: Greta Thunberg

[CodysGameRoom | 2,008]

NBC News Article

Interesting choice. A lot of people thought it would be the Hong Kong protesters. What is VGS' collective thoughts?

[Boosted52405 | 178]

I love it, what an honor.  Very refreshing to see such a young passionate person fight for such an important cause.  Really hope it resonates with the younger crowds.

[G-type | 2,480]

Does anyone still care about Time magazine? but I can see why they chose her.

[Tabonga | 2,317]

Time has chosen some doozies - Adoph Hitler, Joseph Stalin (twice), Nikita Kruschev and Ayotollah Khomeini (among others).

To be fair, they pick those who they feel have made the most impact rather than any necessarily endearing qualities.

I am not sure that Greta has made a great impact - for true believers she at best reinforces their beliefs but I doubt that other than providing a new target she has made much impact on those who don't believe the narrative (at least as it is portrayed). 

 

 

[Code Monkey | 2,006]

Autism community rejoice.

[Tulpa | 3,492]

19 minutes ago, Wandering Tellurian said:

I am not sure that Greta has made a great impact - for true believers she at best reinforces their beliefs but I doubt that other than providing a new target she has made much impact on those who don't believe the narrative (at least as it is portrayed). 

 

I would argue there are more true believers than those who deny it. And she puts a face to the concept, as she'll be the one to have to deal with it in the future.

Edited December 11, 2019 by Tulpa

[cartman | 195]

Pretentious watered down shit, not much unlike when celebrities feel the need to recycle political stances and everyone becomes ecstatic over their opinion. As if it really makes you an affluent thinker just because i've heard you in some fucking song or you have followers on Instagram.

It's a fucking kid ditching school. I think world pomitics should have better shit to do than intellectualize gimmicks.

[Tabonga | 2,317]

21 minutes ago, Tulpa said:

I would argue there are more true believers than those who deny it. And she puts a face to the concept, as she'll be the one to have to deal with it in the future.

I doubt she has created many more true believers though - so at best she has maintained the status quo.   And I doubt she has had much impact on India and China  (among others) - who continually escalate carbon emission releases in excesses far greater than the fairly substantial reductions that the US and western Europe have been consistently doing over the last several years.

 

Edited December 11, 2019 by Wandering Tellurian

[tordur | 28]

51 minutes ago, Wandering Tellurian said:

I am not sure that Greta has made a great impact

 

Ms. Thunberg has had a huge impact, maybe not in the way she intended, but she definitely has gotten a lot of people to actually watch news about climate subjects and to debate it online (although the debate often is directed at ms. Thunberg herself rather than the subject itself). So just bringing (even more) attention to the subject of climate change in such a way that no-one has managed before, not even mr. Gore with his "An Inconvenient Truth" tour, I'd say she has made quite an impression.

 

29 minutes ago, cartman said:

It's a fucking kid ditching school.

That is actually a myth. Most Scandinavian schools are only compulsory up to 9th grade (around the age of 15 or 16), which she has finished. She now has the choice to continue with a higher education or to do something completely different.

Edited December 11, 2019 by tordur

[Skorp | 383]

I actually never even looked into her or know what she is doing, so consider me living under the rock over that. Time is irrelevant anyways now, so it is a whatever for me whoever gets chosen. From what I heard, she is the youngest person in history, so good for her.

[cartman | 195]

Just now, tordur said:

Ms. Thunberg has had a huge impact, maybe not in the way she intended, but she definitely has gotten a lot of people to actually watch news about climate subjects and to debate it online (although the debate often is directed at ms. Thunberg herself rather than the subject). So just bringing (even more) attention to the subject of climate change in such a way that no-one has managed before, not even mr. Gore with his "An Inconvenient Truth" tour, I'd say she has made quite an impression.

 

That is actually a myth. Most Scandinavian schools are only compulsory up to 9th grade (around the age of 15 or 16), which she has finished. She now has the choice to continue with a higher education or to do something completely different.

So that's all that matters, who is trending at the moment? Have Kim Kardashian and Kanye West had some opinions lately that Trump should invite over to hear? She is not the most influential activists nor any type of researcher in the field, and she's not the first one either. She hasn't done shit aside from getting inflated through popularity and the only reason for that is that she's a little girl.

If you're studying something and you don't attend you're ditching, yes.

[tordur | 28]

4 minutes ago, cartman said:

So that's all that matters, who is trending at the moment? 

Not at all - and that wasn't the point I was trying to convey. The point I was trying to convey was that with the massive media coverage of her, and her unavoidable social media exposure, a large amount of people not even talking about climate change before, have now started to voice their opinion - Whether they agree or not. Just getting this kind of extended exposure on the subject is a very large step in the right way - And might affect generation Z and its' successors more than any other climate activist.

10 minutes ago, cartman said:

If you're studying something and you don't attend you're ditching, yes.

That was the point - She's actually not studying, she's finished studying for now - therefore she's not ditching anything. 

She did ditch school last semester, whilst she was still studying, yes - but that's not the case any more.

[DefaultGen | 5,401]

It's nice to shine a light on the most important issue facing the world, but this "award" is essentially meaningless. If the Time Person of the Year is "the man, women, or object that has done the most to influence the events of the year", it would probably be Donald Trump 4 years running. Even on climate change alone, Greta is an activist/leader who has made speeches and organized protests, Trump is spending his term actively rolling back EPA regulations and enforcement over one of the countries with the biggest carbon footprint. And that's just one issue.

I mean, I'm not saying I'd edit the magazine any other way. Having the same person 4 years in a row would be boring AF. But I think few people honestly think Greta Thurnberg has shaped worldwide events more than anyone else this year, it's just a good editorial choice to generate buzz and sell magazines.

Edited December 12, 2019 by DefaultGen

[cartman | 195]

1 minute ago, tordur said:

Not at all - and that wasn't the point I was trying to convey. The point I was trying to convey was that with the massive media coverage of her, and her unavoidable social media exposure, a large amount of people not even talking about climate change before, have now started to voice their opinion - Whether they agree or not. Just getting this kind of extended exposure on the subject is a very large step in the right way - And might affect generation Z and its' successors more than any other climate activist.

That was the point - She's actually not studying, she's finished studying for now - therefore she's not ditching anything. 

She did ditch school last semester, whilst she was still studying, yes - but that's not the case any more.

But it is the point you're making. She's the result of media coverage over a little girl ditching school over a social issues. These movements where people subscribe to this or that topic on social media or are supposed sit/stand/wear/not wear something to show they're allied to a cause are literally kicked off ALL the fucking time.

It's shallow garbage. A mere symptom of the times with likes, followers and celebrity worship.

[tordur | 28]

15 minutes ago, cartman said:

But it is the point you're making. She's the result of media coverage over a little girl ditching school over a social issues. These movements where people subscribe to this or that topic on social media or are supposed sit/stand/wear/not wear something to show they're allied to a cause are literally kicked off ALL the fucking time.

It's shallow garbage. A mere symptom of the times with likes, followers and celebrity worship.

Aye, I don't disagree with you, the phenomena you're describing can be quite tiresome.

The difference with Ms. Thunbergs coverage, as i see it, that not only are the "people subscribe to this or that topic on social media or are supposed sit/stand/wear/not wear something to show they're allied to a cause" engulfed in her cause, but also an abundance of other individuals are actively voicing their opinion about how stupid she is, about her diagnosis, about her school, about her privilige, about her not understanding how the world works, about how she should let the adults take care of it, about how her speeches are scripted, about how her sailing trip was a failure, about how she's not a scientis and so on.

This, that "everyone" is talking about the subject, whether they agree or not, and whether they like her or not, sparks a completely different impact and awareness on the subject, than what subjects brought forth by the Kims and Kanyes of this world would create. Most people how don't care about the Kims and Kanyes just don't debate about them. "Everyone" debates about ms. Thunberg. She's managed to get attention from all generations and in all form for medias, both old and new. I'm pretty sure that the attention she has received was not of the kind anticipated or hoped, but nonetheless, she has managed to get a LOT of attention for a 16-year old.

 

[Rooster | 124]

I somehow doubt that Greta would want or care about this award considering that the paper that Time magazines are printed on, and the glue used to bind them are probably really bad for the environment anyway.

[Estil | 1,264]

This is the most UNdeserving major "honor" since Obama got that Nobel Peace Prize for absolutely nothing.  The HK protesters would be by far the most qualified (I mean they're risking their very lives or at the very least the quality of their lives for their cause and they DON'T get the luxury of freedom of speech/assembly people in the US often take for granted).  I can't believe Time wasted this on some girl who gave a few passionate speeches for the past year and little else.

Edited December 12, 2019 by Estil

[Estil | 1,264]

1 hour ago, Wandering Tellurian said:

Time has chosen some doozies - Adoph Hitler, Joseph Stalin (twice), Nikita Kruschev and Ayotollah Khomeini (among others).

To be fair, they pick those who they feel have made the most impact rather than any necessarily endearing qualities.

I am not sure that Greta has made a great impact - for true believers she at best reinforces their beliefs but I doubt that other than providing a new target she has made much impact on those who don't believe the narrative (at least as it is portrayed). 

Remember Time's Man/Woman/Person/Thing of the Year is not necessarily meant to be an honor, as such.  It's more who they think made the most impact in news/history and such...for better or for worse.

[m308gunner | 352]

1 hour ago, cartman said:

So that's all that matters, who is trending at the moment? Have Kim Kardashian and Kanye West had some opinions lately that Trump should invite over to hear? She is not the most influential activists nor any type of researcher in the field, and she's not the first one either. She hasn't done shit aside from getting inflated through popularity and the only reason for that is that she's a little girl.

If you're studying something and you don't attend you're ditching, yes.

She's not, as tordur has pointed out. She's a teenager. But that hasn't stopped people from trying to use her age and mental state to shield her from criticism (including her parents). If one were prone to feeling uncharitable, one could interpret the left's tendency to use children to push their agendas as monstrous. Maybe even evil. But that can't be the case, because they care so much about children. Right?

Hell, if all it takes to make Time's list is for a teenager to emotionally vomit all over the adults in the room they should cast a wider net. They'll have centuries worth of candidates just from the last few years.

[Tabonga | 2,317]

31 minutes ago, Estil said:

Remember Time's Man/Woman/Person/Thing of the Year is not necessarily meant to be an honor, as such.  It's more who they think made the most impact in news/history and such...for better or for worse.

Not to quibble but (from my post) 

"To be fair, they pick those who they feel have made the most impact rather than any necessarily endearing qualities."

[Rooster | 124]

42 minutes ago, m308gunner said:

She's not, as tordur has pointed out. She's a teenager. But that hasn't stopped people from trying to use her age and mental state to shield her from criticism (including her parents). If one were prone to feeling uncharitable, one could interpret the left's tendency to use children to push their agendas as monstrous. Maybe even evil. But that can't be the case, because they care so much about children. Right?

Hell, if all it takes to make Time's list is for a teenager to emotionally vomit all over the adults in the room they should cast a wider net. They'll have centuries worth of candidates just from the last few years.

Well, right-wing politicians equally ignore scientists and children alike when it comes to climate change.  So it's par for the course, I guess?

[Estil | 1,264]

35 minutes ago, Wandering Tellurian said:

Not to quibble but (from my post) 

"To be fair, they pick those who they feel have made the most impact rather than any necessarily endearing qualities."

All the more reason the HK protesters were by far the most qualified.

[Rooster | 124]

Just now, Estil said:

All the more reason the HK protesters were by far the most qualified.

I would have rather seen the HK protestors win, to be honest. 

[m308gunner | 352]

17 minutes ago, Rooster said:

Well, right-wing politicians equally ignore scientists and children alike when it comes to climate change.  So it's par for the course, I guess?

I'm sure you agree that those two groups are not equally qualified to deal with climate change, nor should their opinions be weighed equally.

To be fair, children (especially emotional ones) should be ignored most of the time (unless you're their parent). Dark will be the day when politicians start listening to emotional children when crafting public policy... Wait... $#!t 

[coffeewithmrsaturn | 100]

3 minutes ago, m308gunner said:

I'm sure you agree that those two groups are not equally qualified to deal with climate change, nor should their opinions be weighed equally.

To be fair, children (especially emotional ones) should be ignored most of the time (unless you're their parent). Dark will be the day when politicians start listening to emotional children when crafting public policy... Wait... $#!t 

I may have misinterpreted the meaning of his post, but I thought he was talking about ignoring children in the sense that by not dealing with the climate problem, conservative politicians are harming the next generation who will have to bear the cost.