JK Rowling featured in Guardian person of the year

[Blackandwhitehorse]

www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/30/guardian-readers-nominate-their-person-of-the-year

The kids don’t care about actually people in actual need.

It was perfectly clear that that JKR by far had the most votes and that the Guardian hurriedly changed the format when they realised.

@AliceThorpe - it's not perfectly clear and I doubt what you are saying is true. I'd be quite happy to see JKR named Person of the Year, and I am sure Guardian were a bit surprised to see how many readers gave her name, but it was NEVER a poll format, so it's impossible to say anyone had the most votes. Guardian run these "Tell us" articles all the time, and they don't ask for votes, they ask for readers to write a sentence or a paragraph, then they might edit them into an article where they quote some of the submissions.

It's good to see that the many responses on Twitter encouraged enough people to submit JKR's name on the Guardian's webpage that they couldn't ignore it. But responses on Twitter were not votes either, and there is no evidence that there was ever a plan to announce a "winner".

@AliceThorpe

It was perfectly clear that that JKR by far had the most votes and that the Guardian hurriedly changed the format when they realised.

Trying to bury her win by making it an article about some of the many people doing good works (and some random youtuber) is just another hamfisted and transparent act of misogyny.

Let's not pretend that there is anything good about this. The Guardian dug a hole in which they could not pretend the woman they have consistently lied about had won and they put up an absurd smokescreen so they can gaslight readers into pretending the hole didnt exist.

There was no 'win' and the format never changed. It is and always was part of their 'tell us' section - a interactive section where they invite experiences and opinions on different subjects every few days.

If you actually read the Guardian you'd have seen it there. Here's today's Tell Us question:
www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/30/tell-us-have-you-changed-your-mind-on-getting-vaccinated-against-covid?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

The Guardian does not run a 'person of the year' award, and never has. It didn't ask for votes, it asked for opinions. I'm interested to know how you think that it is "perfectly clear" that the Guardian did what you think it did, when it very clearly (to anyone who reads The Guardian) that it didn't.

The gaslighting accusation is absolutely ridiculous. The entire thing was there for us to see, from the moment they put the question up.

@saraclara, if the Guardian wasn't taking a tally of opinions (like votes) how did it know which people to feature in the article? I'm wondering what the criteria was.

@CandidaAlbicans2 - to answer your question, maybe the journalists who work on the "Tell us" format did their usual process of browsing the submissions, and picking out the ones in their judgement would make an article with enough variety to interest their readers (or more cynically, enough controversy to get people clicking and discussing - which seems to have worked!)

[quote CandidaAlbicans2]@saraclara, if the Guardian wasn't taking a tally of opinions (like votes) how did it know which people to feature in the article? I'm wondering what the criteria was.[/quote]
The same as any of their 'Tell Us' round ups I assume. They read through the comments sent to them and write an article based on some of them. It actually would have been really easy for them to leave JKR out if they'd wanted to, because it's simply a public comment/opinion section with no rules or criteria involved. But they didn't.

So they haven't said who got the most votes...?

@heelforheelandtoefortoe

So they haven't said who got the most votes...?

Sigh.

Once again. They didn't ask for votes. They asked for individual opinions. The regular Tell Us section is never about data or tallying. It's about people telling their experiences or offering their opinion. There is never a 'here's how many people said...' outcome.

There's absolutely nothing stopping posters going to the 'Tell us' section of the Guardian to see for themselves how the segment works, rather than jumping to invalid conclusions or simply making up conspiracy theories.

Again, I'm a JKR fan, so have no agenda here other than to try to point people towards the facts, rather than some of the rubbish that's been spouted both here and on Twitter.

@saraclara - you're doing sterling work explaining this.

I'm afraid the false idea that JKR was winning a vote and the Guardian shut down the poll has got too much traction now!

[quote DadDadDad]@saraclara - you're doing sterling work explaining this.

I'm afraid the false idea that JKR was winning a vote and the Guardian shut down the poll has got too much traction now![/quote]
I should give up really! But I hate fake news, and it's almost worse when it comes from people who have the same opinions as me. I want to think that 'our side' is better than that. But no. People of all opinions will fictionalise anything to suit their agenda, apparently. It's really dispiriting.

@saraclara Please carry on! Truth is incredibly important, whichever 'side' it 'serves'.

Don't be dispirited, @saraclara . 2021 was the year that the Guardian said

many readers also nominated the author JK Rowling [as their Person of the Year]

and quoted one of their readers:

She is very inspiring for women and is supportive of women’s rights

It's also the year that the CEO of Stonewall when asked if JKR is transphobic said "no idea" and in the same interview (on Woman's Hour) said:

So, gender critical beliefs […] have always been protected under the Equality Act and it’s absolutely possible for people to hold gender critical beliefs without expressing them in a way that’s harmful to trans people.

What will 2022 bring?

What will 2022 bring?

It brings a review by Lucy Mangan of the Harry Potter reunion programme. And it makes me wonder if Mangan is a tiny weeny bit Terfy.

www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2022/jan/01/harry-potter-20th-anniversary-return-to-hogwarts-review-perilously-close-to-emetic