2010 Time Magazine Person of the Year: Not Julian Assange

Mark Zuckerberg: Time Magazines person of the year

For connecting more than half a billion people and mapping the social relations among them, for creating a n"ew system of exchanging information and for changing how we live our lives, Mark Elliot Zuckerberg is TIME's 2010 Person of the Year." Time Magazine

I find it kind of odd that even though Julian was destroying the popular vote and rating. They choose a non-controversial character who was number 10 in the popular vote to be their "person of the year".

Do you think Time Magazine did this for legit reasons, or did they pick Mark over the most popular candidate Julian for reasons that we all know could be true. What do you think?

The Article

reply to post by ATScory

Seeing as they picked Ben Bernanke last year, I don't bother reading a single word printed by Time. #$%^ Facebook up the @$$. People who are on facebook all the time have no life; a digital life with digital friends isn't a life. Facebook is helping to ruin my generation and the b who made it shouldn't be awarded.

Did this guy even do anything in 2010? he created facebook a while back. oh and he didn't create social networking, he created facebook. Time is worthless.

I made this thread a week ago:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by ATScory


Since they nominated Hitler, I believe Mark is doing a better job at linking everyone's data and getting passed privacy laws than Julian is.

Originally posted by ThinkingCap
reply to post by ATScory

 

Since they nominated Hitler, I believe Mark is doing a better job at linking everyone's data and getting passed privacy laws than Julian is.

They didn't just nominate Hitler; Hitler WAS person of the year, sometime in the mid 30s.

Anyway, back to the topic; I cannot believe that they even CONSIDERED anyone this year that was not named Julian Assange. It's not like they haven't named controversial or unliked figures before (again, see Hitler) but in recent years, TIME has been making some really stupid choices. For instance, they picked Obama before he'd even become president; what the heck had he done before then? Not very darned much. Though, in Obama's defense, at least he'd done some things in politics and law (though still undeserving of person of the year) whereas Zuckerberg has only written Facebook, which will be dead in five years, just like other once-popular social networking sites before it, and nobody will even know who he is by then.