Time chooses 'YOU' as person of the year.

[Smashing]

Read about it here

My reaction to be posted later.

[milowent]

i, for one, am quite honored. except for the fact i have to share it, with, um, everybody? this is grade creep on the most absurd scale possible ever.

[spbfilm]

How sad that in an entire year we could not find a single person to look up to or applaud for their good deeds. Sadly, there really was no one that deserved it (in my opinion). So I guess we've been given this "honor" as a consolation prize...for all the CRAP we've put up with.

[thiller]

I don't mean to rip off the Daily Show's piece on this "Man of the Year" bit. However, when I was at the newsstand and saw my face reflected in the cover of the magazine, I was extremely honored. I couldn't hold back the tears. It's about time I get the recognition that I deserve.

The video segment from last evening's daily show is not up yet on the Internet, but it was quite clever.

[Smashing]

I agree that "Web 2.0" has been a huge force in our lives this year. Especially for the people on this board, it's undeniable.

I disagree with how Time frames this story saying, "It's about the many wresting power from the few..."

I think this is an illusion.

Who are "the few" that are losing power? TV executives?
According to this Forbes article TV viewership has actually gone up 8% from 5 years ago.
It says cable viewers are up, while the 4 big broadcast networks' numbers are down. But if you look at the parent companies of those networks, GE, Disney, News Corp, and CBS, only CBS looks like it is losing money these days. The others, being more diversified, are wildly successul, and News Corp owns "Web 2.0's" MySpace. So "the few" who run those companies aren't losing power. Meanwhile the few that own YouTube, now owned by the few who own Google, have gained a lot of power.

It's true that new internet technology empowers us, but to use these "free" sites, we have to pay for internet access, computers, and cameras, visit sites with ads, and as the Time article rightly puts it "work for nothing." So we pay for the privilege, and the few (while their names and faces may change) are still getting rich off the many, and are still ultimately in control.