The Person of the Year is an annual issue of Time magazine that highlights a significant person or group which most influenced the year’s events, for better or for worse.
Beating out the Hong Kong Protestors, Donald Trump, Nancy Pelosi, and the Ukrainian scandal whistleblower, Greta Thunberg, the 17-year-old Swedish climate change activist, was given the designation for 2019.
Thunberg is a rather controversial figure. Supporters commend her for her work in environmental activism, but critics see her as not much more than a condescending child spouting off hot air. As evidenced by the onslaught of arguing on social media, Thunberg receiving the title of Person of the Year has been quite a controversial choice.
It is important to look at why Time magazine made this controversial decision, and the fact that the online outrage it generated lines the company’s pockets. It’s no trade secret that controversy creates success. Trump knows it, Kanye West knows it, and so does Time magazine.
Outrage generates clicks, clicks show ads, and ads make the company profitable. As the saying goes, “any publicity is good publicity.” Regardless of whether you support Time’s decision or not, and there are good arguments to be made for both sides, you have likely clicked the article and maybe even tweeted out a hashtag such as #Time or #PersonOfTheYear. Google Trends and Twitter data both show that the Person of the Year article is a big attention-grabber for the magazine.
Judging by Time’s previous winners, which include Vladimir Putin, Mikhail Gorbachev, Ruhollah Khomeini, and Adolf Hitler, the publication has never shied away from picking people that will start a heated conversation about their annual issue.
Person of the Year is not meant to represent the best person of the year, or the most moral person of the year, but rather the most influential and newsworthy person. While sometimes the two factors match up, this is not necessarily the case.
No matter what you think about Thunberg and her activism, there’s little doubt that she has been a loud voice on the topic of climate change and has grabbed much attention. This is specifically the kind of person that a publication like Time would want to highlight for their share of the scoop.
While there’s nothing wrong with enjoying a healthy argument about a controversial topic, this event is an important warning in how political controversy in the media seems to so effectively captivate our emotional side. Especially in this highly politically-divided time, it is important to take a step back and realize the true motivation that media companies have for encouraging controversial discussions.
It’s not Time magazine’s goal to spread diverse ideas around the globe out of the goodness of their hearts, but rather the advertisement money that controversial discussions always seem to generate. So the next time you’re mad about something you read, have a quick thought: who’s getting rich off my outrage?
Graphic by Paloma Callo.
