Zuckerberg beats Assange to claim Person of the Year™ 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 …
...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"
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.
"...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...
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!
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!
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
