The distinction is arbitrary and appears to be generally used to highlight the most important things of the year through a person, group of persons, or event in

The distinction is arbitrary and appears to be generally used to highlight the most important things of the year through a person, group of persons, or event involving people, which is obviously quite wide. If you want a person of they year in-depth individual profile, you are welcome to look elsewhere, but that general type of thing is obviously important to many others and is true to what the series is. No flaw there. > The entire "silence breakers" is simply about creating medial rage against people who are not yet proven guilty which is in my opinion immensely stupid. I suspect your disapproval of the choice is motivating you to discredit the article series as meaningless, which is a flawed argument to take. Not to mention that many people have made apologies and confessions. If you think this is about "medial rage", you are missing the point. This is about progress on a huge cultural problem that has pretty much been in existence since the days of early men. This selection is highlighting the people who have helped drive that progress recently.