Time Magazine proved its biased announcing Mark Zuckerberg as Person of the Year 2010 instead of the rightful winner Julian Assange who in the user polls place first versus Mark's tenth place. Thats right, they didnt even name the second place winner as the winner, they've chosen the tenth place winner. While yes Mark did an awesome thing with Facebook. The thing is the Person of the Year award is supposed to be about who the people believe was the most influental and did something completely different and special or at least made a massive statement with their actions. Mark created a social entertainment site, like Myspace before it. Even with its massive amount of users, its nothing special, considering imho Myspace is better since you have control of how your individual profile looked and operated. Julian Assange showed a new use for the internet, showed what journalism is supposed to be, and pulled the wool from millions of people's eyes about the world we live in. Time proved the bow to political pressure, and apparently bad judgement, and ignored user votes and went with a person that truly doesnt deserve the title. This isnt the first time they did this though, in 2001 Osama Bin Ladin won the user poll and Time announced a completely different person.

Here is the list of votes. As you can see Julian Assange has 21 times the votes of Mark.

Who Will Be TIME's 2010 Person of the Year?
help This table lists the poll results as voted on by Time.com users. To sort the data, clicek on any of the column headers. refresh results
Rank Name Avg. Rating Total Votes
1 Julian Assange 92 382026
2 Recep Tayyip Erdogan 80 233639
3 Lady Gaga 70 146378
4 Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert 81 78145
5 Glenn Beck 28 91746
6 Barack Obama 58 27478
7 Steve Jobs 61 24810
8 The Chilean Miners 47 29124
9 The Unemployed American 66 19605
10 Mark Zuckerberg 52 18353
11 Liu Xiaobo 68 12962
12 Sarah Palin 28 30787
13 David Cameron 31 22596
14 Hu Jintao 49 12046
15 Robert Gates 41 13142
16 Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf 48 9493
17 Nancy Pelosi 37 12214
18 Craig Venter 56 8073
19 Arne Duncan 27 14301
20 Elizabeth Warren, Mary Schapiro and Sheila Bair 46 7298
21 David and Charles Koch 32 9147
22 LeBron James 21 13580
23 Jonathan Franzen 22 12135
24 Tony Hayward 22 11600
25 Hamid Karzai 28 8755


Mark Zuckerberg: 18,000
Julian Assange: 382,000

Ill definitely say, I will never pick up another copy of Time or anything else published by them.

there is no journalism in mass releasing stolen, irrelevant, and unimportant diplomatic cables or dangerous files like shopping lists of targets for terrorists to attack and afghan informant identification (names and locations) .  perhaps if anything not garbage or disgusting was released he would have made it.   this guy is a pos molesterer and murderer.  TIME should not honour those sorts of people.  he is scum.

Edit:  MrBubbles person of the year is Commander Shephard.

Time will get a visit by some men in black suits with dark sunglasses if they announce Assange POTY. :P

You by far have no idea wtf your talking about

http://www.freetalklive.com/content/youtube_ex_cia_analyst_ray_mcgovern_defends_julian_assange

The user poll has Lady Gaga at #3, so I wouldn't trust it too much either... 

Nothing you said made any sense.

I'd also like to point out that Stalin, Hitler and Ayatollah have been named Person of the Year. It's about impact, whether it's positive or negative should be irrelevant. Time just chickened out because they'd catch some flack from all the US businessman and politicians who have had their dirty laundry shown to the public.

if you cant understand it thats not my fault. 

and whats the problem with time realizing they shouldnt glorify trash?  poty should be someone that others should aspire to be like. 

So you believe people should aspire to be like Stalin, Hitler, or Ayatollah?

"time realizing they shouldnt glorify trash"

"poty should be someone that others should aspire to be like"

Well just because Times named horrible people man of the year in the past doesn't mean they should continue repeating that mistake. The fact that Bin Laden wasn't named man of the year highlights that maybe Times has decided not to glorify terrorists.