The Gateses and Bono: Time Magazine’s ‘Persons of 2005’

Time Magazine has been naming its person of the year since 1927.  This year, they’ve named the Gateses and Bono the ‘Persons of 2005.’ 

The aim is to pick “the person or persons who most affected the news and our lives, for good or for ill, and embodied what was important about the year, for better or for worse.”

Their choice works for me.

Comments (2)

  1. Jerry Brett says:

    I think that it is somewhat of an insult to "The Gateses" to have to share the cover of Time with Bono. Bono is just another musician with his own promotional, er I mean, political views.

    Hey bono, how about giving away millions of your own dollars, much as the Gates’ have instead of asking the "big mean" countries (which happen to be sucessfull) to forgive debt which was lended to them with the promise that it would be paid back. Charity is charity, but a loan is not supposed to be charity, hence the name. How about raising money to pay back the debts by selling Ipods?

    Now Bill Gates on the other hand has really changed many peoples lives for the better. With a vision for innovation and doing the difficult work that it takes to be innovative, he has shown the type of leadership that it takes to be world class. The generosity of the Gates’ also must be applauded. Actually generating the money that it takes to help the poor people around the world is not easy to do.

    I guess Time just wanted to spice up the cover a little, since admittedly just having the Gates’ on the cover would be a little bland IMHO.


  2. RobBurke says:

    Jerry, thanks for the note. I know there quite a few people would agree with you. One of the local tabloids in Dublin ran the headline "Bono wins top honour for being a bully boy."

    I’m as cynical about grandstanding as the next guy, but I do believe Bono has a whole lot of clout and does a lot of good. I find your opinion very interesting; it had never occurred to me that his presence diluted the honour. Anyway, I followed up on this article in another post. Thanks again for your thoughts on this.