You are Time Magazine's Person of the Year

Yep, that is, if you use or provide content to the World Wide Web.

If you do that, you are part of the digital democracy and Time Magazine considers these actions to be a shift from the power of institutions to individuals.

I have to question Time's understanding of sociological concepts, because the WWW is an institution.

The 2006 "Person of the Year" package hits newsstands Monday. The cover shows a white keyboard with a mirror for a computer screen where buyers can see their reflection.

abcnews.go.com

[edit on 2006/12/16 by GradyPhilpott]

That is so dumb

They've completely flushed down the toilet the entire idea of TIME's Man (Person) of the Year. It might as well be any other issue of the magazine.

LAME.

abcnews.go.com...
The winners this year were anyone using or creating content on the World Wide Web.

Great...so 1 billion teenagers whacking it to Internet porn are now Time's people of the year.








[edit on 2006-12-16 by wecomeinpeace]

I can't believe the stupidity of this statement.

"If you choose an individual, you have to justify how that person affected millions of people," said Richard Stengel, who took over as Time's managing editor earlier this year. "But if you choose millions of people, you don't have to justify it to anyone."

abcnews.go.com

They might have pulled off this scam, if the editor hadn't admitted his abject irresponsibility.

I hope no one buys the issue.

:sigh:

I like it.

Especially the bit about being "part of the digital democracy."

Seems empowering to me. It says ordinary people have a chance - to influence history, affect the world, maybe even change it.

Yeah us.

I'm outdoing TIME. My "person" of the year has a constant influence on every man, woman, and child on the planet. As well as upon all fruit bats, breakfast cereals and llamas.

That's right;

"Gravity"

Is my person of the year.

Take that, Time. (TM)


All the best.
.

Originally posted by soficrow

It says ordinary people have a chance - to influence history, affect the world, maybe even change it.

Or if not to change it, to at least edit the wikipedia article about it.

Originally posted by soficrow
[...]Seems empowering to me. It says ordinary people have a chance - to influence history, affect the world, maybe even change it.

Yeah us.

That is gist of what I got from that article myself. That no longer is information flow restricted by the traditional media gatekeepers of old. Today we have bloggers and people who post in forums like you and me.

That's my take on the piece. Everyone, keep on blogging, keep on posting the truth. Keep on editing out factual errors and outright lies from the wikis. Remove the power of the traditional gatekeepers in shaping our thoughts and opinions.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
I have to question Time's understanding of sociological concepts,

I thought it was a lame choice. Seriously. Did they get lazy or what? Looks like they all just sat around eatting donuts and decided they couldn't be bothered with a real choice this year. Or they were too scared to choose someone in this politically charged world ....

If they wanted to do an internet changing the world thing then they should have picked the person who invented it .... (Al Gore )

Seriously seriously LAME!!

where's the scam?? just wondering, some of yas sound like time just ripped you off of something quite valuable or something.. "The Man of the Year Bit" is Time's, they can do with it whatever they want to..heck they could make Micky Mouse the man of the year..it's their right...

but personally, I like what they did, another topple of the powerful elite, acknowledging the power of the not so powerful. confirmation that those in power only have the power that we chose to give them, and well, we can choose to take back.

Originally posted by dawnstar
..heck they could make Micky Mouse the man of the year..it's their right...

Hah, you don't even have to be a cartoon character....yup. In 1982 The Computer.... was TIME's "Man Of The Year".

I agree, this was a lame cop-out on TIME's part.

history1900s.about.com...



[edit on 17/12/2006 by SportyMB]

Going off of SportyMB's link, how is this different from, say picking "American Women" in 1975, "The Middle Americans" in 1969, or "Endangered Earth" in 1988?

Although I do agree with Grady; it would've had more effect if that editor would've kept their mouth shut. Up until reading that (I'd seen it on CNN.com this morning) I thought it was kinda neat.

Originally posted by djohnsto77
That is so dumb

They've completely flushed down the toilet the entire idea of TIME's Man (Person) of the Year. It might as well be any other issue of the magazine.

I agree with DJ hear.
I think this for the man of the year is a compleate cop out. They have done the same in years past and I think all of them have been a cop out to what the man of the year is supose to be.

What if a High School named everyone Valadictorian?

What if after the NFL season every player was named MVP?

2 questions?

Can I use this on my resume?

Will it be mentioned in my obituary?

You know what happens in situations like this? TIME is going to get slammed by everyone, and it will end up being the highest selling issue of the year. Everyone likes seeing a car wreck, I guess.

As if I didn't have enough problems.

Adolph Hitler, Man of the Year - Jan. 2, 1939 .

I love it! I think it's about freaking "time".

There is not a single person that I can think of who deserves this honor more than the contributors to the wealth of information and truth to be found on the Internet.

Don't take the Internet information for granted, kids. If not for for it, and the wealth of information contributed by people like you and me, what might we all think of 9/11? What might we think of George Bush and this war in Iraq? Think of our limited knowledge of what's happening in Iraq.

As it is, when something 'comes up' on the Internet, many times, mainstream media has to deal with it and respond. What if it never got out there? What limits might be on the information to which you and I have access?

Yay, TIME! Yay, alternative media! Yay, BLOGS! Yay, conspiracy discussion boards! Yay, ATS! I accept the award!

Originally posted by Implosion
As if I didn't have enough problems.

Adolph Hitler, Man of the Year - Jan. 2, 1939 .

While I don't agree with giving Hitler props for anything....he did have a HUGE impact on the world. And from my understanding, that's what "Man Of The Year" is all about. Well, obviously if Hitler got the award it doesn't have to be a positive impact....just an impact.

[edit on 17/12/2006 by SportyMB]

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
There is not a single person that I can think of who deserves this honor more than the contributors to the wealth of information and truth to be found on the Internet.

You forgot to mention pedophiles, porn addicts, gamers (nothing wrong with that), trolls, spammers, crooked salesmen, etc....

They would also be included in as winners.

From the OP's source:
The annual honor for 2006 went to each and every one of us, as Time cited the shift from institutions to individuals citizens of the new digital democracy, as the magazine put it. The winners this year were anyone using or creating content on the World Wide Web.

And this goes back to my previous post, "Man Of The Year" is not limited to just someone/thing having a positive impact on the world....I guess this year it goes to both groups of internet users.

[edit on 17/12/2006 by SportyMB]

I like the concept, but I don't think they should have used "You" as the name. I'm not sure what name would be appropriate. The first thing that comes to mind is "Bloggers". My next choice would have been "Internet" but that is too general and would include all the previously mentioned undesirables.

My guess is that they couldn't decide on any one person.

Well, as the article states, if they had decided to go with one person for the award, it would have been.....

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad