Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg has defied WikiLeaks supporters to claim Time magazine's Person of the Year™ crown. Julian Assange came in third, behind the Tea Party, the chaotic but influential agglomeration of US right wingers. WikiLeaks had openly campaigned for him to win, issuing fanciful claims it would protect him from …
Zuckerberg, Assange, who cares?
I find them equally insufferable.
I reiterate a previous comment: Lester should have been nominated, voted for and won. PARIS was definately the media-generated hilight of my year.
Just to clarify
Most people in the US don't give a damn about the Tea Party either - it's globally irrelevant as they say.
1) Made a social networking site. Er.. that has abominable documentation for developers, moving goalposts and had numerous security-related negative headlines
2) Some American-only "political" "activists" that basically seem to be a thinly veiled NeoCon "grassroots" endeavour. I'm a Brit so.. that's pretty much all I see of it. And Palin being victoriously ignorant on TV occasionally, of course.
3) Someone who set up a website that allows people to whistle-blow. (It's not like he's hacking into CIA databases now, is it? Putting up with all the stick happened after the wikileaks founding)
Must have been a shit year. Admittedly, flew by for me.
Facespace or Mybook (whatever) has had bugger-all impact on my life. Not likely to change at any foreseeable time in the future, either.
BADGERS PAWS, I say.
And Assange has had an impact, how? I don't use Facebook, but I can tell you that Facebook has had much more impact on my life than Assange. Of course I live in the States, so perhaps that just proves the point...
very funny guys?
This a joke by anonymous fixing the vote again, surely.
Anonymous fixed the vote for Assange, who won it. Time decided that the 10th-place finisher in the popular vote was who people *really* wanted to win.
I don't think it's the same contest
...that Moot won. Moot was voted "Most Influential Person" in April 2009 through an Internet poll, while "Person of the Year" 2009 was Ben Bernanke (US Economic/Financial policy wonk) which I think is decided by Time's Editorial Board. So two different things AFAIK - from the same magazine.
Personally, I'm on pins and needles to see the results of "Time's Sandwich of the Year"
Better than the alternative.
Glad Zuck beat the "Tea Party" at least.
I'm sort of in two minds about Assange though. I like that he doesn't get this to feed his world-encompassing ego, but I do think he is more noteworthy than some guy who wrote a stalking website.
The Assange affair isn't over yet though, so perhaps he'll get his nod next year. Posthumously or not...
Additionally, it does mean that we can now validly compare Zuck to Hitler. Though I think Hitler got a better deal on Time's choice of cover art.
...thought it was those 'Airplane!' chaps...
"...and its cultural significance was acknowledged in a Hollywood movie that dramatised its creation at Harvard..."
Hollywood tends to dramatise a lot of real life figures that had major cultural impacts, not always to the historical figure's/group's credit.
This win says more about Anonymous in that they are unable to rig a simple poll. Now back in the day...
Zuckerberg - Tea Party - Assange
So - the main qualification needed for time person of the year is that you are a smug self-righteous twonk (or group of same).
Its all about the biggest self publicist...
After Karzai hasn't been saying how they would be fine without the American's for quite a while now!
Zuckerberg however has been in overdrive, chatting with the PM in the worst webchat ever...
because I don't see the Democrats anywhere near the top of the list.
"YOU" was person of the year once.
Also, Stalin. Twice. And FDR (indeed a smug self-righteous twonk, also a dirtbag), thrice.
Yes, it's bad.
But people like Obama get Peace Nobel Prizes so arbitraryness is everywhere.
Zuckerberg? Honestly? Right, that's it!
Human race has lost it, the end is near!
I shall away to the nearest hostelry, where I shall drink until I can no longer feel my legs!
Twat of the year more like.
It's good to know that to be Time's person of the year you have to be an exploitative egomaniac who refers to his income generators* as bitches and dumb fucks. All I want to know is when the Steven Heyer and Kent Ertugrul** will get the honour.
*Not sure how to refer to people who have profiles on Facebook, since the customers are the advertisers and calling them "users" seems stupid as they're the ones being used.
**The phucks behind a wiretapping-based advertising firm.
I thought this award was Person of the Year. So how did the Tea Party come second? Or were the poor voters confused and thought they were voting for Mr T?
Paris - because she told hard-hitting journo Fearne Cotten that "In real life I'm completely different. I'm very down to earth, I'm smart, I know what's going on.” and Fearne believed her!
Time defines the Person of the Year as the person that generated the most news/interest. They frequently choose non-people (eg. The PC was selected Machine of the year) and various groups of people have been chosen in the past soldiers etc.
I Hadron had nothing that!
Ha ha! Cotten and Hilton in the same room together? I bet you could actually "feel" the intelligence leaking from the room.
There we were worrying about the Swiss mob and their atom-smasher collapsing the universe, when this meeting of intellects must have come pretty close to causing a serious disruption in the space-time continuum!
I expect more
from my $100m. ;-)
That cover photo is absolutely terrifying. Once glimpse of it and it tears at your soul, nips straight through the uncanny valley and goes to the land of WTF?
I'm not sure if it's the lighting to blame, the lens or that Mark Zuckerberg is just plain freaky looking.
Time is staffed by idiots
Time magazine really does appear to be staffed by complete morons these days. "The Tea Party" was a candidate for "person of the year"? Obviously these people have problems comprehending the meaning of the word "person". Sure the Tea Party was influential (for people in the US at least), but that's just nuts.
And Zuckerberg gets the award "for changing how we all live our lives"? Are they on drugs? Or just plain stupid? As far as I'm aware, Facebook hasn't changed the way I live my life, but maybe that's just me. Me, and the millions who have Facebook accounts, but haven't bothered with them for months, because it's a complete waste of time, that is.
I guess the problem is that Assange made the like of Time look very very stupid. Because he's basically done what they should have been doing all along - journalism.
Changed the way we all live our lives? Not mine or the lives of the billions of people without a Faecesbook account.
Nor has it changed the life of many of those who do have a FB account either
It certainly hasn't changed mine.
Give it to Lucky Lindy again
Wasn't Hitler "Man of the Year" too? (Hey, Goodwin's law in 1 post!)
Person of the Year vs. Assassination
Hum... Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (1953), John F. Kennedy (1961), Martin Luther King, Jr. (1963), Anwar Sadat (1977), Ronald Reagan (1980).
Better Assange stays off the list, after all.
Criminals don't usually get Person of the Year awards
Perhaps if the award was Moron of the year Assange would have won, but I suspect most people are well aware that Assange is a disgusting piece of garbage who is more than willing to ham many people in his lust for attention. Hopefully Sweden will prosecute him for his crimes and he can rot in prison.
pork or beef
Quit your beefing about Juliam hamming it up. He is going like a lamb to the slaughter, not sheepishly. Is he a turkey or are you just chicken, AC ?
I'll get my coat. Its the one with Rogets in the pocket.
I'm right out of troll food...
Criminal and pedantry
I'm open to correction on this but surely a criminal is someone who has been convicted of a crime.
Loathsome as you find this fellow Assange, he has not been convicting yet of any crime. He has been accused of sexual misdemeanours in Sweden, but I would rather wait until he is convicted before jumping to such accusations. He may have done things that would have Americans or people in America hauled before courts but he is neither American nor in America when the deeds were done.
One final question, why do you detest him with such vehemence? All he has done is allow diplomats' gossip to be published online. Embarrassing to those in power but of little harm in the whole. You do have to admit that one who is willing to put his life at risk for such an ideal of whistleblowing is indeed a brave (and foolhardy) individual.
He may be a slimy, attention-seeking piece of shit but that is hardly unique amongst those in public life. GWB and Mr. Blair are responsible for the deaths of many hundreds of thousands. Do they arouse your ire so, or is that different?
Could it be that you feel very strongly about those who sleep with women without condoms on? Is that the source of your rage? No doubt you see the woods for the trees.
Anonymous Coward = ironic
American's never did get irony and you Anonymous Coward are exactly that an anonymous coward. You'd fit right at home under Stalin, don't ever question authority, do as you're told and never think for yourself. Ironically you do it I bet in the name of democracy, freedom of speech and western values, shheeeesh you a re numpty
This is the most
...depressing [almost-]news I've read all day. Utter cheese-pig.
All this does is prove that "Time Person of the Year" is irrelevant.
Somewhat like the Nobel Committee doing that by giving Obama a prize for doing nothing.
Are you sure you have the right category?
Surely this is the annoying and self serving c*nts of the year category?
"Brave New World" is indeed near.
Pass the Soma. Obama Mond is on TV.
I think Assange was more influential this year...
Then again, considering HOW much I believe Zuckerberg is an ass, I guess he had to have some "influence". And it IS better than the Tea Party.
How about Manuel Gonzalez?
In a display of extraordinary courage, he risked his own life to save those of the 33 trapped Chilean miners. And not only was Manuel Gonzalez the first person down the shaft, he was also the last out. The former professional footballer was strapped into the tiny capsule - nicknamed Phoenix - before plummeting 2,040ft to the 33 trapped miners.
Zuckerburg or Gonzalez, I know which one I would choose.
So be it...
Alas, if it still had been called Man of the Year, Zuckerberg would not have qualified.
Zuckerberg has arguably had a bigger impact on society. Too bad for Julian "I am Danger" Assange.
Zuckerberg? Why, because a movie came out about him?
Good old Time Magazine. Playing it safe again. Hasn't had anything interesting to say in years.
Man of the Year?
Not Bitch of the Year?
(Oh come on, someone had to say it!)
Person of the year?
How can a disorganized agglomeration be considered a person? That's one bad case of multiple personality disorder!
Entity of the Year?
This leaves it open for all sorts of computer science constructs too.
Only yesterday we were told that Assange was leading the poll with over double the next person's votes.
Today he's third. Can't imagine how that happenned, Sherlock.
Either way Manuel Gonzalez should have wone, but then hes (a) not American and (b) Latino so no chance. Pity
It wasn't the movie
The movie was done by a Sony company and Time is a Time Warner company so clearly that wasn't it. Perhaps it was more to not piss off a government so they couldn't pick Assange or Liu Xiaobao. In the end, being milquetoast, they went with who they figured was the least globally offensive option.
What do you mean it's an alien icon? I thought that was the Time cover.
Laughing all the way to the bank.
We should all be so lucky as to have a cheap bit of monkeytwaddle we create for our teenage cousins/ classmates/ co- workers become such a money maker.
Having said that, I'm not entirely sure that _Time_ should be blithering on as if this is a good thing.
If Manuel Gonzalez had been a square-jawed white Yank, he would have won it by a country mile.
Of course for an American they would have needed a wider hole.
Paris, knows all about wider holes
Isn't it interesting that whenever a geek emerges from the Pond of Intellectual Illumination that we all inhabit and does something fantastic (like connecting 550m people) the rest of the pond dwellers start slagging him off?
Facebook is a success, it is bigger and better than anything any of us will achieve in our lifetimes, and like it or not Mark Zuckerberg is responsible for that. Time has made the right choice.
As an aside, girls aren't really allowed in the Pond. But pictures of Paris are rife.
Zuckerberg isn't a geek...
...he's a cock.