My remark wasn't as vacuous as it may have seen. Placing the emphasis on people, the logical consequence when applying this to Ilford (actually Harman) would be that you'd have to pick a person from the organization and put them on the list. And it seems that there's just not that many people within Harman who have had any substantial media exposure and thus direct influence over the years.
Arguably, the same could be said perhaps for a company like Adobe (whose CEO is indeed on the list), but that company is probably just too big to avoid altogether. Let's not forget that as photography goes, film is a tiny niche, so that would sensibly cut back specific film-related places to the list to perhaps 1% or so, max. So there would be place for maybe one person on the list who is specifically film-associated. And in that case, I would argue that someone like ADOX' Mirko Bödecker or ex-Impossible/Polaroid's Florian Kaps are much more likely candidates. Or perhaps someone associated with Kodak, for that matter. Btw, also missing from the list are representatives from Canon, Nikon, Sony - companies with their strong foothold in the camera industry would arguably be even more entitled to a spot on the list to begin with.
So yeah, film is their blind spot. With good reason if you look at it rationally. Film is fun, but when it comes to how society at large interacts with the field of photography, it's pretty insignificant.