Nadav Kander, TIME

This past week, TIME announced their 2012 Person of the Year: two-time winner, President Barack Obama. Though noted for his dynamic leadership skills “amid great adversity,” TIME‘s choice has already been criticized with people claiming that the title is obsolete. According to one reporter for The Atlantic, 

[it is] impossible to think of a less interesting, more predictable choice than Barack Obama, who also won the award four years ago… It’s a big missed opportunity. Just look at the other finalists – especially Malala Yousafzai, the Pakistani teen blogger shot in the head by the Taliban for her advocacy for women’s rights. 

2009 TIME 100 honoree Sarah Palin had similar thoughts, sharing the following on Fox News:

…TIME magazine, I think there is some irrelevancy there, to tell you the truth. I mean consider their list of the most influential people in the country and the world, some who have made that list — yours truly! that ought to tell you something right there regarding the credence we should give TIME magazine and their list of people.

Yet, what stands out about her argument is not calling the TIME 100 list and Person of the Year “irrelevant,” but questioning the magazine’s reasoning for including herself on the list.

Ironic? Or just oblivious?