I think the editors were ready to consider following the audience opinion, but probably backed off when they saw the polls' results:
www.time.com/time/personoftheyear/2006/walkup/
2006-12-23 12:28:31 · 9 answers · asked by Richard C Mongler 3 in News & Events ➔ Media & Journalism
website adress is:
www.time.com
/time
/personoftheyear
/2006
/walkup/
(remove linefeeds before "/")
2006-12-23 12:31:53 · update #1
Have to agree that they may have backed off from the poll results - may have received pressure about things like that UN speech.
2006-12-24 01:46:38 · answer #1 · answered by sunshine25 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
definite, one female in October, and regrettably some days in the past, on the 10th, actual one of my acquaintances from decrease back in severe college took his existence... i'm attempting to concentration on the actual incontrovertible truth that even although I hadn't seen him in a lengthy time period we had an excellent catchup chat 2 weeks in the past, that's making me experience truly comforted, yet not at the same time. i'm nonetheless in wonder.
2016-12-01 03:14:31 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Another example of how conservative and collaborative the media is with government. The people clearly see the positive impacts of Chavez but the blind, fake rage and ill-informed american public will not have that opportunity as long as the media continues to replace truth with spin.
2006-12-23 13:33:08 · answer #3 · answered by Charlooch 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
The list sucks.
2006-12-23 12:34:03 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
I think I will put it on my resume
2006-12-27 00:04:40 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
A year from now you won't even care.
2006-12-23 12:44:13 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
It does sucks
2006-12-23 13:32:35 · answer #7 · answered by Agentj100 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
It's gonna be MYSELF.
I voted twice!
2006-12-23 12:30:07 · answer #8 · answered by Florence P (le retour) 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
It's stupid.
2006-12-23 12:36:20 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋