We've chosen TIME's Person of the Year for 2006. What do you think? Do you agree with our choice? Who would you have chosen? Here are some of your responses:
I TOTALLY agree with your choice. Web 2.0 tools are changing how we communicate and network with our global neighbors. It is transforming entertainment, journalism, and even education. As a high school technology teacher, I embrace Web 2.0 tools with my students. They are collaborative, engaging for students, and provide the "real world" experiences that are lacking in education today. I'm sure your articles with enlighten many people THANKS!
Absolutely agree with your choice. It IS a brave new world replete with its typos, rants, raves, ugliness, beauty, and passion. I stand, a crowd of one applauding.
As a history teacher, I do not think that the Me Generation should have been the Perosn of the Year. I have always looked to the person of the year article as the culminating aspect of the Machiavellian ideas in the world. A person will be selected and the readers will decide if if they are pciked because as a nation we uniformailly love them or we fear them. It seems almost pointless to pick a generational group of techies when the major of the world is still without the ability to join this group. I understood the group seections in the past but this year I am truly disappointed.
Well, thank you! This is perhaps the only TIME in my life that I will be recognized as Person of the Year! Now, as one of the winners I would like TIME to provide a link for a certificate recognizing me as Person of the Year. I will type in my name and print it. In this competitive world job market, this would be a boost for my resume!!!
What cowardice not to acknowledge Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (I said acknowledge, not aggrandize!). I predict within a year events will make a mockery of the "editorial discretion" that so conveniently allowed you to ignore reality.
This year's " person" of the year is EXTREMELY disappointing. It is hard to imagine that you pay people a lot of money to be " creative" and they come up with this. AWFUL!
Awe shucks, thank you, thank you. Actually, TIME's choice for Person of The Year was a great choice. You gave recognition to the greatest force humankind has ever seen... humankind!
I don't agree with your choice for person of the year. I definitely would have chosen the trio Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld , because of the immense power they have and the major influence they have had on the future of this country. Their actions have more profoundly affected every citizen in this country much more than a group of people who decided to generate some web content for their own entertainment or to enjoy the select group of people who happen to have internet access and actually decided to access that content. When you refer to "YOU", it fails to include all Americans, because not every American visits YouTube or has a Myspace account or generates any web content for that matter.
You would have done just as well selecting "nobody" as person of the year. What were your editors thinking?
What a cop-out! They couldn't decide amongst all of the wack jobs in the news today, so they gave up and chose YOU. What a joke.
Lame lame lame lame lame! Not even funny or cute... just flat-out lame. You should have put our president on the cover. He and this administration have had an enourmous impact on the lives of hundreds of thousands of people around the world especially the dead ones.
Nowheresville, Anxiety USA
Let's see. George Bush, Tony Blair, Ehud Olmert, Mahomed Ahmadinejad, Saddam Hussein, Muqtada al Sadr, Sacha Baron Cohen, Donald Rumsfeld, Raul Castro and Hugo Chavez. Arguably, any one of these people could have been TIME's Person of the Year for 2006. Instead you chose me. That is so cool!!
I wonder if you see the irony in having named "us" bloggers, YouTubers, Wikipediasts, and others expressing ourselves on the web, as POTY, but then, despite talking about "digital democracy," not even bothering to MENTION the results of your online poll, won by Hugo Chavez in a landslide. We "persons of the year" are obviously a lot more perceptive than you are, recognizing the significance of someone who has singlehandedly changed the course not only of Venezuelan history, but also is widely recognized to have affected elections in Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua, and, negatively in Peru and Mexico, and whose assistance has made a clear difference to Cuba as well.
The people of Iraq. they should be the people of the year now that the war of choice has destroyed their countries infrastructure But I guess we forget what it is to not have electricity 24 hours a day. Or we have never have been bombed all night long! America owes the Iraquis an apology and then you will see peace restored in the country. Remind them that they are not just sunni and shiite inculc in them the fact that they are Iraquis first. Let us join them and rebuild their country. We can do it later and loose more people in the process or we can apologize now and go forward on a positive note. It is so simple to do just say I would like to say on behalf of America that we are sorry for the damage that we have done to your country and people. We wouldlike to make ammends and work together with you to bring back your contry. Now was that so hard to do? Let President Bush copy it until he gets it right!
San Diego, CA
Thank you. Choosing me and my friends as Person of the Year was bold, brilliant, and brave. It renews my faith in magazine journalism. In fact, it makes me feel better about "the media" in general. From its roots in the Whole Earth Catalog, through its adolescence in the punk-rock, self-publishing "zine" movement, to its full flowering on the cover of your magazine... the Do It Yourself revolution is on. Good to see you noticed.
A lot of hype and a disappointing choice. The world is in such upheaval the choice should have had to do with Iraq.
It is surely not YOU or WE. TIME is supposed to honor or acknowledge PERSONs with Identity of great significance/contribution to the world in the selction process and objective. YOU do not have the identity in such sense and one can not honor or acknowledge for such purpose. It makes the whole excercise meaningless and create no significance and value to US/WE.
Was that the best You can do?
Does this mean that I can now state on my resume that I was chosen as TIME's "Person of the Year" in 2006? All joking aside this is a thoughtful and uplifting choice, TIME. Kudos!
Hard to ignore two people. GWB for, wether you agree or not, trying to protect the greatest nation in the world while being up against the wall. The guy that died in the Oregon forest trying to find help for his family. He showed the country and perhaps the world, what true love, sacrifice and dedication is, not to mention the will to live. Very dissapointed in TIME for not picking a PERSON but a group... not much of a spine on your part.
I think it is fantastic! The world's problems will long remain and the fighting in the Middle East will rage on for centuries to come as it has centuries. The world has had too much of itself and its troubles, why celebrate what matters to people most; their lives with their joys, their sorrows, and their moments of grand humor.
While I agree we do control the information age, I think Al Gore should have been person of the year because of his work to save the planet.
I was really surprised when I logged on to TIME.com and discovered the person of the year wasn't Warren Buffet. I believe YouTube is a fad. Web 2.o won't be anything to speak of ten, maybe fifteen years from now, but Buffet will still be giving. Think of the people that will be living ten years from now as a result of Buffet's gift. The idea for the 2006 person of the year was a good one, but I believe Buffet deserves the award.
Little Rock, AR
I agree with your choice and I am honored to have been selected as Person of the Year for 2006. I am wondering when I might expect to receive my complimentary year subscription or at least a framed copy of this issue as my award? Will you advise me on my wardrobe for my interview with Diane Sawyer?