Comments on: Mark Zuckerberg—Not Julian Assange—Voted TIME Person of the Year

By: Illusions

Illusions — Sun, 19 Dec 2010 21:34:20 +0000

Popular media is little more than a propaganda machine, including Time, so it doesnt surprise me. Of course Facebook is more important than what Julian Assange is doing. What could be more anti-American-politics than the idea of an informed public? I can barely even watch the “news” because of the lack of actual information and the excess of fluff on even supposedly news only channels.

By: bs

bs — Sun, 19 Dec 2010 21:05:08 +0000

Ridiculous. Asange was clearly the ‘man of the year’. Time magazine has just lost all credibility for it’s “gutless” choice. sad state that a passing fad is confused with world changing politics….

By: Vikram Teva Raj

Vikram Teva Raj — Sun, 19 Dec 2010 16:35:10 +0000

Don’t confuse the issue, the way Time has confused the issue for ages because of its desire for political access.

This is what the corporate media the small-government people at Fox News want gets you.

I note that Washington Post is now literally hosting meet-the-senators dinners for special interests.

The deal here is one of you rub my back, I rub yours.

And this is not the government per se. Remember how Liebermann helped maintain the status of most expensive healthcare system per capita, and literally third world healthcare, by opposing the public option. This is the establishment at work.

The Tea Partiers are interesting in a demonstration of a business model. I note that 13 of their representatives’ chiefs of staffs are lobbyists.

Also, the number of earmarks they snuck into the bills they are opposing.

There needs to be a site better than factcheck.org at explaining political motivations.

By: Albert Bakker

Albert Bakker — Thu, 16 Dec 2010 19:56:35 +0000

As was shown with great clarity to the world the US regime can order Amazon and the biggest plastic bankers around as if they were trained dogs any time they so wish. One brief, but apparently very lucid call from Uncle Joe (Lieberman) and the matter was settled.

That was very impressive.

So I think it’s pretty courageous of Time to have allowed Assange to so demonstratively win the public vote. Even if they have to settle for a certain friendly mr. Zuckerbrot or something or other, nevertheless it is part of the story now. Of course, one always has to remember that it’s their magazine and they can do whatever they want with it.

Well, just as long as it doesn’t upset Uncle Joe too much.

By: cray

cray — Thu, 16 Dec 2010 18:40:39 +0000

Nick, if you think the Tea Party wasn’t influential in 2010, you’re either not paying attention, or you’re letting your political biases cloud your thinking. Love them or hate them, the Tea Partiers had a tremendous impact on this country this year, and dismissing them with a wave of the hand is incredibly juvenile.

By: QuietDesperation

QuietDesperation — Thu, 16 Dec 2010 16:38:51 +0000

Why does anyone care? Has Time magazine even been relevant this century?

By: Chris Taus

Chris Taus — Thu, 16 Dec 2010 12:40:09 +0000

Although I wouldn’t call him Person of the Year, I’d definitely say he’s the most INFLUENTIAL Person of the Year– And quite possibly the decade.

By: Charles Schmidt

Charles Schmidt — Thu, 16 Dec 2010 04:26:56 +0000

This kind of thing that Time does will be what kills them who cares about Zuckerberg or face book how has it helped people or the country? If that is the best that they can do they will go down faster than they are.

By: nick

nick — Wed, 15 Dec 2010 20:51:48 +0000

Considering the Tea Party movement was a runner up, all I see is Time’s increasing irrelevance to anything of actual importance. There’s a reason the iPad hasn’t saved the magazine industry yet, and that reason seems to be the magazine industry.