I couldn't predict the alternate winner, but I knew they would eliminate Assange due to controvery. Isn't controversy what makes the person of the year?


TIME is obviously trying to lay low and and not draw attention to itself in this time of information warfare.


Thoughts?

Lifted from comments section in OP link by a savvy poster. Thought it would be helpful to see actual reader's choices:

Here are the top ten vote-getters, followed in parentheses by the rating of how influential voters believe these individuals are:

1 Julian Assange ..............................382,026 (92%)
2 Recep Tayyip Erdogan.....................233,639 (80%)
3 Lady Gaga......................................146,378 (70%)
4 Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert........78,145 (81%)
5 Glenn Beck.......................................91,746 (28%)
6 Barack Obama..................................27,478 (58%)
7 Steve Jobs........................................24,810 (61%)
8 The Chilean Miners............................29,124 (47%)
9 The Unemployed American.................19,605 (66%)
10 Mark Zuckerberg..............................18,353 (52%)

Ron Paul is also part of the psy-op. As was Gandhi and anyone that opposes or tries to expose information about the governments of the world. Yep, if you expose the governments of the world you are ofcourse a CIA operative.



Anyway, why the hell would mark zuckerburg be on that list? Facebook is a piece of #.

I know nothing about zuckerburg, and don't really care to. What's so revolutionary about facebook in 2010 that's different than 2008, or 2009?

Originally posted by Somehumanbeing
Ron Paul is also part of the psy-op. As was Gandhi and anyone that opposes or tries to expose information about the governments of the world. Yep, if you expose the governments of the world you are ofcourse a CIA operative.



Anyway, why the hell would mark zuckerburg be on that list? Facebook is a piece of #.

edit on 15-12-2010 by Somehumanbeing because: (no reason given)

Nothing strange about the choice:
- The Truth-seeker, and the favorite of the Slaves (because, that is how they see us), gets ignored...
- The NSA operative, that has been caught divulging peoples private data, and personal information, and that has pledged to continue to do so, gets selected...

Of course, if you go back and see Time's "Man Of The Year" elected, you will see that it's business (psychological warfare, propaganda, and the "submissive society agenda") as usual.

What is scary is that Time Warner Inc. is the world's largest propag....eeeeerrrrr media conglomerate. The fact they own Turner (yes, the Eugenicist) Broadcasting System, and CNN, should tell you about their agenda, and their controllers - NSA.

Do what I did, STOP BUYING THEIR PROPAGANDA CRAP. Vote with your wallet, after all, that is the only thing they care about.

Yes, nice rewarding of the "how-to-forget-reality". It's just like rewarding the creator of a nightclub or a TV show. Let's not care about Erythree, let's forget poverty, let's ignore liberty violations... Why should we care about political hypocrisy, lyings, why should we reward those that fight against these things.

NB : But hey, at least public's choice was Assange, why not...

Originally posted by v1rtu0s0
What's so revolutionary about facebook in 2010 that's different than 2008, or 2009?

Perhaps that FB hit the 500+ million subscriber mark. That's a lot of wallets. Not to mention a kid in his 20's turned down a Billion dollar offer to sell to Yahoo (I think).

To be clear, I think FB is over rated and share your skepticism. As if somehow 30 years later I wanted to be reacquainted with people I avoided in HS and college. I just don't get it. FB is like the vanity plate of the net.

This is infuriating. Not because I care about Time magazine, but it's just another media outlet that is blacking out info on wikileaks, truth and working against freedom of speech.

The people have spoken and been ignored and subverted.

TIME CAN SUCK IT

Actually the list is funny.......................Lady Gaga? Really? It's just a popularity contest like anything else, so he didn't win, he still got lots of attention.

Wait, I don't understand completely. Fine, TIME got rid of #1, but why make #10 the new #1? What happened to #2 - #9? What's the point of the poll in the first place if they're going to pick who THEY want anyway?

More importantly, what will happen when 4chan catches word of this?

Ben Bernanke was last year's person of the year...apparently all you need to do to become person of the year is nearly destroy the economy and give 10 trillion dollars to the biggest banks.