Time has named Mark Zuckerberg Person of the Year for supposedly making the world a more open and better place. But wait — isn’t that what Julian Assange just did?
Time Magazine has named Mark Zuckerberg Time Person of the Year 2010. Zuckerberg’s Facebook climbed past 500 million users in 2010, while Aaron Sorkin’s depiction of the company’s beginnings in “The Social Network” captured our imaginations with modest box office numbers and tons of press. 2010 was indeed the year of Zuckerberg, especially after the 26-year-old genius announced he would be giving away billions of dollars to philanthropic initiatives.
Yet his mission to make the world a more open and better place seems far from realization. Facebook is a great way to keep up with people you normally wouldn’t keep up with while being bombarded by advertising. Malcolm Gladwell challenged its social utility in an engrossing essay, reducing Facebook to a weak-tie time waste. NY Times tech writer Nick Bilton this morning questioned whether we’ve hit social media overload, and if our romance with Twitter and Facebook is not unlike a summer tryst: intense but short-lived.
Julian Assange, however, actually has made the world a more open place. He masterfully pulled back the curtain on high-level democratic discourse, which, as it turns out, involves as much teenage backbiting and shit-talking as a John Hughes film. Assange is the Toto to our Dorothy, the one brave enough to pull back the curtain and show the world the wizard isn’t there.
For his efforts, we’ve awarded Assange with an international arrest warrant, public disgrace, humiliation, and a pending indictment for the United States Department of Justice. We’ve awarded Zuckerberg with billions of dollars and a hall pass to raid our privacy. What a world — especially to be in Person of the Year in.





December 15, 2010 at 8:30 pm, Julian said:
Wow, this writer is ignorant. Facebook like or hate has made the world a more open place. People are constantly able to quickly grab information about friends and family. Making the world an open place does not mean putting people lives at risk and and throwing out peoples dirty laundry to the world.
Julian Assange should win the Douche-bag of the year award. He took a website Wikileaks, and destroyed it by moving away from the original purpose.
December 15, 2010 at 8:45 pm, anon said:
Wow, this comment is ignorant.
“Making the world an open place does not mean putting people lives at risk and and throwing out peoples dirty laundry to the world.” — except that one could argue Facebook does the exact same thing. I've read more stories about murderers finding their victims through facebook than deaths by anything Wikileaks has released. Wikileaks has done more for information transparency than any of facebook's 500 million users. Why? Because no one gives a shit about your friends or family outside of you. Wikileaks releases actual news, whereas on facebook you're more apt to find dickery of this sort: “OMG just had a diet coke!!!”.
Only an idiot would think Facebook does more to make the world an open place.
December 16, 2010 at 2:32 am, Greetings29 said:
All I have to say is that Mark Zuckerberg should not take close ups.
December 16, 2010 at 2:34 am, RupertEvert said:
Can all social networking sites just go away? Enough already. They may “connect” some people, but it also breeds idleness, chaos and purposelessness.
January 05, 2011 at 6:11 pm, Facebook Movie to Make More Than Facebook Shares? | Death and Taxes said:
[...] must comply with SEC regulations once it exceeds 500 investors, and we know that’s something Zuckerberg is trying to avoid like the [...]
January 23, 2012 at 5:06 pm, Chris said:
This author is a complete idiot. Facebook is extremely smart and user-friendly with how they place advertising. It is much less disruptive to readers or viewers than the ugly ads lining the right side of THIS ARTICLE.
As far as privacy, Facebook offers a platform for more connectedness and better social interaction. They offer every type of privacy you could imagine for each individual account.