That's it! No more Time magazine for me!

[SUBMAN1]

Just had to cancel that subscription. This mag is way too whacked out liberal for me. Come in to the center for once and I'd probably enjoy it more. I mean, if you really want me to read your mag on a continual basis, why the hell is Putin on the cover as man of the year? Why do you fill it up with one sided politics from the US? I don't want to read this stuff anymore. Its out! Done.

-S

[Enigma]

You just made an insignificant choice in your life and we all read about it. Awesome! :up:

[joegrundman]

congratulations, i suppose

[Letum]

Thanks for informing us about your cancellation for a magazine subscription.
May we have the wisdom to use this knowledge only for good.

[August]

The thread title couldn't be more descriptive but y'all still had to read it so you could complain about wasting your time? :dead::D

[SUBMAN1]

You guys aren't getting it. Why exactly is Putin their man of the year for? Someone explain that to me?

I read the article. They claimed that they are not honoring him, yet then the proceed to honor him?

WHo else here gets Time?

This month is a nice fat picture of Obama on the front. Never can say a wrong thing about him. I wonder if they noticed that you don't really know much about him to be able to say something wrong about him?

-S

[SUBMAN1]

The thread title couldn't be more descriptive but y'all still had to read it so you could complain about wasting your time? :dead::DHahahaha! :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

-S

[Blacklight]

Heck. I'm all for liberal. I'm one of the most liberal people here....

But Putin !?! :doh:

[Sailor Steve]

No, you're the one who's not getting it. Hitler was once their man of the year, as was the Ayatollah Khomeni and Saddam Hussein.

If you bothered to read their explanations you would know that for a major newsmagazine like Time the 'Man Of The Year' award goes to the person whom they judge to have had the biggest influence on the news that year; no other reason than that.

[peterloo]

I also got fed up with biased articles in Times. I guess I will cancel my subscription once it's over

Although the majority of the audience is Americans, I can't tolerate any biased reports on China, for the sake of fairness.

I was so upset after viewing a report of angry Beijing people for the poor handling of relocation work and the arrangements. Now, it's not the content itself that make me upset, as I do know this problem, but the editor says the Chinese name of the package to leave Beijing during the preiod of Beijing olympic has a word "tao" which rhymes with the word for condom. Although this is a fact I don't know why the editor has to say this, except in a poor attempt to smear the image of China and Chinese government.

(due to copyright concern I can't give the proof, which is a scanning of the magazine article)

Simply because you are sleeping on a blue bedsheet does not imply, in anyway, that you are sleeping on the excretory product of bulls.

Another article deals with the sport facilities that does the training of Chinese atheletes. In the article, they say that the people that is arranged to meet with Times reporter as "propaganda officer". I must say that, although the Chinese word for 宣傳 has possible English meanings, in this case, that word should be translated to "promotional" rather than propaganda. And why would the central government allow a sport facilities to deal with propaganda stuff? Simple negligence of truth and another patheptic attempt to backmail China, in order to attract USA audience

I guess I can do nothing except to cancel the subscription

[Skybird]

Peterloo, saying this without any felt hostility, sometimes you give me the impression you are one of the most naive persons I have ever met or interacted with in my life. "why would the central government allow a sport facilities to deal with propaganda stuff?" Are you pulling our legs? ;)

[Enigma]

No, you're the one who's not getting it. Hitler was once their man of the year, as was the Ayatollah Khomeni and Saddam Hussein.

If you bothered to read their explanations you would know that for a major newsmagazine like Time the 'Man Of The Year' award goes to the person whom they judge to have had the biggest influence on the news that year; no other reason than that.

Biiiingo.

The thread title couldn't be more descriptive but y'all still had to read it so you could complain about wasting your time? :dead::D

I read your post, and that was a waste of time, too. :lol:

[Biggles]

.....for better or for worse, ...has done the most to influence the events of the year.

That summons up the TIME "Person of the Year" pretty much.

[Tchocky]

For sh*ts and giggles, I'd like to restate the blindingly obvious mistake Subman has made regarding TIME's man of the year.

It's about influence, not honour.

Also, the current edition of TIME carries this interview with John McCain. make up your own mind.
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1836909,00.html

EDIT - Oh lordy, misspelling the word "mistake".

[SUBMAN1]

No, you're the one who's not getting it. Hitler was once their man of the year, as was the Ayatollah Khomeni and Saddam Hussein.

If you bothered to read their explanations you would know that for a major newsmagazine like Time the 'Man Of The Year' award goes to the person whom they judge to have had the biggest influence on the news that year; no other reason than that.That is what they said. Putin definitely wasn't that man. He hardly even showed up in the news this/last year.

Then they proceed to honor his great ideas. They can call it like they want on the cover saying we aren't doing this, but they did.

-S

[Biggles]

I can assure you mate, that Putin has been on many persons lips and thoughts in Sweden this year, probably other parts of Europe too. Many thoughts and words about a certain underwater pipeline that would, if created, disrupt the sealife in the Baltic Sea quite badly. And, something that many here reacts to, it would cross swedish territorial waters....

[Enigma]

Putin definitely wasn't that man. He hardly even showed up in the news this/last year.
.....:o

[peterloo]

I guess skybird is at least 30 years older than me (maybe much more psychlogically mature) :D. He may be the one knowing most about politics in this forum :up:

(the above is in a reply that skybird believes that I am the most "immature" one here)

no offense, but ya, I just believe that propaganda stuff should be something that starts at central government.

But I still take a firm stance that Times should act neutral, as a popular magazine that is read worldwide.

[peterloo]

In reply to Putin being the man of the year ---

Putin simply set the world into motion by trying to revive the diginity of Russia. His foreign policies may be controverisal and hardly mentioned in Westen medias, but wait, I wonder which representive of a country can make decisions that please everybody and therefore being mentioned by every media?

Furthermore, being man of the year does not mean that he is the man who contribute most to mankind or anything else but "IMPACT". Russia, under Putin's influence, is like a bear who is awaking. This is why he gets such an award.

There are actually many people who may deserve the title "man of the year" but unfortunately they can choose 1 person. That's why Putin is chosen.

[Sailor Steve]

.....for better or for worse, ...has done the most to influence the events of the year.
Nice caveat. I wish I'd thought of it.

Then they proceed to honor his great ideas. They can call it like they want on the cover saying we aren't doing this, but they did.
I can't answer to that, as I don't read Time. I don't argue that they're not biased; I was just addressing the "Man of the Year" statements.