TIME's Man of the Year: Mark Zuckerberg??

[Little-Acorn]

Who???

I'd never heard of him, never bought anything he sold, never saw him on TV that I can remember. This is the guy who had more influence on world history this year than anyone else???

Oh, I see, he's the creator of Facebook. I used it a few times after my brother literally begged me to, my wife yelled at me for putting a pic of our house on it, and I dropped it, life's too short. Basically a nonentity as far as I'm concerned. Useful for fluff and idle time when you've got nothing better to do, I guess.

And now this guy is "Man of the Year"??? Hell, I'd think **I** had more influence than he did... and I didn't do much of anything, besides helping our Boy Scout troop and guiding our family thru various travails.

Did he have more influence (for better or worse) than, say, Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid, who imposed more socialism on the U.S. this year than anyone since FDR... and got more members of their party kicked out of Congress than anyone since the same FDR?

TIME is really scraping the bottom of the barrel, in their effort to avoid acknowledging the harmful things done by their leftist idols... or the reaction of the country to those things.

http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2036683_2037181,00.html

[fj1200]

I'm seeing it as the anybody-but-Palin choice. If they can't ridicule her they will ignore her and by giving her the nod they would have been acknowledging her influence.

[Abbey Marie]

It really depends on their criteria, and since I never buy these mags/rags, I wouldn't know what that is. I will say that given the number of people consumed with FB, MZ has had a boatload of influence on the daily lives of Americans. Whether that influence is important is another story. Hence the need to know their criteria.

If I were choosing, I couldn't bring myself to choose a nimrod like Harry Reid, regardless of his effect on the country. But if forced to go on your reasons above, I would have to pick George Soros.

[Noir]

Who???

I'd never heard of him, never bought anything he sold, never saw him on TV that I can remember. This is the guy who had more influence on world history this year than anyone else???

Oh, I see, he's the creator of Facebook. I used it a few times after my brother literally begged me to, my wife yelled at me for putting a pic of our house on it, and I dropped it, life's too short. Basically a nonentity as far as I'm concerned. Useful for fluff and idle time when you've got nothing better to do, I guess.

And now this guy is "Man of the Year"??? Hell, I'd think **I** had more influence than he did... and I didn't do much of anything, besides helping our Boy Scout troop and guiding our family thru various travails.

Did he have more influence (for better or worse) than, say, Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid, who imposed more socialism on the U.S. this year than anyone since FDR... and got more members of their party kicked out of Congress than anyone since the same FDR?

TIME is really scraping the bottom of the barrel, in their effort to avoid acknowledging the harmful things done by their leftist idols... or the reaction of the country to those things.

http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2036683_2037181,00.html

Well firstly TIME hold a 'most influential 100' and 'person of the year' don't get the two confussed.

Secondly don't underestimate the power given to the people via social media (the likes of Facebook, twitter, tumblr, youtube etc) it may of passed you by at the time, but you may want to look in to when Chris 'm00t' Poole was named as TIMEs most influencal person, I'm sure you has absolutely no idea who he his, but having a understanding of him, and the semi-underground inwhich anon operate youd better understand the blow-back from wikileaks, the LoIC attacks against MasterCard, mirror formation and so on.

You may not think such things important, but I'd suggest you're missing a true perspective of the modern world, and where it's heading.

[revelarts]

FYI
<object width="640" height="390"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/aT322GiT5lw&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/aT322GiT5lw&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></embed></object>

Here's Times list since it started
http://history1900s.about.com/od/people/a/Man-Of-The-Year.htm
very few I'd celebrate.
Seems the Mag goes along with whoevers' in power pretty consistently.
---Hilter and Stalin .. twice.. are the most amazing though--

[Noir]

Also incase anyone didn't know, TIME held an online poll to see who the public wanted as their person of the year and the winner, by a massive margin, was Wikileaks founder Jullian Assange. But it seems TIME did t have the balls to go with him. =/

[red states rule]

It really depends on their criteria, and since I never buy these mags/rags, I wouldn't know what that is. I will say that given the number of people consumed with FB, MZ has had a boatload of influence on the daily lives of Americans. Whether that influence is important is another story. Hence the need to know their criteria.

If I were choosing, I couldn't bring myself to choose a nimrod like Harry Reid, regardless of his effect on the country. But if forced to go on your reasons above, I would have to pick George Soros.

If TIME actually stood by their own rules there is no reason why the Tea Party would not been the winner

They did change the course the county was on, and had the most influence on the country

But since TIME (like the rest of the liberal meida) openly campaigned them, it is clear as to why they never would have been selected

[Thunderknuckles]

FYI
<object width="640" height="390"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/aT322GiT5lw&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/aT322GiT5lw&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></embed></object>

Here's Times list since it started
http://history1900s.about.com/od/people/a/Man-Of-The-Year.htm
very few I'd celebrate.
Seems the Mag goes along with whoevers' in power pretty consistently.
---Hilter and Stalin .. twice.. are the most amazing though--

Not a bad list overall I suppose. There's a few questions marks in there but Hitler and Stalin certainly deserve to be on the list. They were enormously influential, just not in a good way.

[Kathianne]

I'd have gone with Tea Parties, hands down. They were influential in the last election and have been so in the past weeks.

However, this I give Zuckerberg credit for, (yes, I've heard of him):

http://www.newjerseynewsroom.com/state/oprah-show-zuckerberg-believes-booker-and-christie-can-improve-public-education-with-video


Oprah Show: Zuckerberg believes Booker and Christie can improve public education (with VIDEO)
Saturday, 25 September 2010 10:51

oprah092510_optBY BOB HOLT
NEWJERSEYNEWSROOM.COM

Mark Zuckerberg, founder and CEO of Facebook, announced on the Oprah Winfrey show Friday that the title of a program to pump $100 million into the Newark school system is the "Startup: Education Foundation."

When asked why he chose Newark, Zuckerberg said, "Newark is really just 'cause I believe in these guys," referring to Newark Mayor Cory Booker and N.J. Gov. Chris Christie...

[red states rule]

The Tea Party had the biggest effest on the nation, on the liberal media, and was the major force behind the Dems defeat




The Tea Party phenomenon in 2010 was as much an American ethos, or zeitgeist, as it was a political effort to be defined by some group’s endorsement of a specific politician or campaign. True, various activist groups latched on to the moniker to put forward a common sense conservative view; however, that was only a portion of what the Tea Party concept came to represent.

Near the end, the struggle between a Democrat and a Republican in this or that race often looked more like a battle to demonstrate which one liked tea more than the other. The impact of the Tea Party concept on the recent mid-terms is immeasurable because it was so broad. Over the past year, the Democrats and their aligned media machine went from trying to demonize the Tea Party as everything from wild-eyed bands of racists, to paid AstroTurfers doing the work of Wall Street. None of those grossly false and unfair mischaracterizations took hold.
In the end, exit poll data had over 40% of voters claiming to view the Tea Party in a positive light – one far more positive than their view of Democrats, or Republicans, for that matter. All Moe’s bit of silliness at NBC demonstrates is that media today, or at least NBC, refuses to end its either disingenuous, or utterly clueless campaign to attempt to marginalize the Tea Party concept – and the commonsense views of a great number of Americans in the process.

That’s why so many Americans have abandoned old media for new in the first place. And if NBC and other networks continue on this course, the ultimate benefactor will continue to be new media outlets determined to provide Americans with a less elitist, more balanced, and genuine interpretation of news and current events, political and otherwise.

http://bigjournalism.com/driehl/2010/11/04/nbcs-weak-post-election-analysis-of-the-tea-party/

[Gaffer]

The tea party is getting bigger and more powerful in spite of the media.

[red states rule]

The tea party is getting bigger and more powerful in spite of the media.

and they are still targets of the liberal media simply because they are still a threat to their tax and spend agenda

The left still does not get it and neither has the liberal media

They still think the Tea Party is a bunch of racist, uneducated, and uninformed dupes

[trobinett]

and they are still targets of the liberal emdia simply because they are still a threat to their tax and spend agenda

The left still does not get it and neither has the liberal media

They still think the Tea Party is a bunch of racist, uneducated, and uninformed dupes

What? You saying the politicians are bailing from the Dem's, and Republicans, and swelling the ranks of the Tea Party?:laugh:

Seriously though, It will be interesting to see the reaction of the liberal press as the Presidential election draws near. I see them bringing out the big guns, and spending boat loads of money to deflect the ground swell that the Tea Party will cause.:salute:

[jimnyc]

Also incase anyone didn't know, TIME held an online poll to see who the public wanted as their person of the year and the winner, by a massive margin, was Wikileaks founder Jullian Assange. But it seems TIME did t have the balls to go with him. =/

Wow, I'm shocked that a man that has hackers backing him all over the world and uses trojans and hijackers on hundreds of thousands of PC's in order to perform DDOS attack, would somehow win an online poll!

They didn't have the balls to go with him because they probably figured it wouldn't do their appearance much good to choose the man who distributed stolen/confidential documents and has literally endangered lives as a result.

[Noir]

Wow, I'm shocked that a man that has hackers backing him all over the world and uses trojans and hijackers on hundreds of thousands of PC's in order to perform DDOS attack, would somehow win an online poll!

They decided to go with the poll when hackers rigged it so m00t won in 2009 (not only did the fix him winning it, they gamed all the top 21.)


They didn't have the balls to go with him because they probably figured it wouldn't do their appearance much good to choose the man who distributed stolen/confidential documents and has literally endangered lives as a result.

Given the previous winners, did you think they thought Hitler or Stalin never 'literally endangered lives'?

[red states rule]

What? You saying the politicians are bailing from the Dem's, and Republicans, and swelling the ranks of the Tea Party?:laugh:

Seriously though, It will be interesting to see the reaction of the liberal press as the Presidential election draws near. I see them bringing out the big guns, and spending boat loads of money to deflect the ground swell that the Tea Party will cause.:salute:

The liberal media is still ignoring what happened. Now it is all about how everything effects Obama

Will Republicnas "work with" Obama?

Will the Tea Party "work with" Obama?

Will compromise help Obama?

Will Obama lose his base if he cuts deals with Rpublicans?

off course the liberal meida will fall in line and back Obama. They did everything they could to smear the Tea Party and anyone who opposed Obama - but it was not enough

2012 could be a repeat of 2010 if the economy still stinks and Obama's ego continues to to run wild