Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

You Are Time Magazine's Person of the Year (Mirror on Cover)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
RamboLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 08:57 PM
Original message
You Are Time Magazine's Person of the Year (Mirror on Cover)
Edited on Sat Dec-16-06 09:06 PM by RamboLiberal
Yep, they put a mirror on the cover as a PC screen. You are the Person of the Year for driving the information age.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html

The "Great Man" theory of history is usually attributed to the Scottish philosopher Thomas Carlyle, who wrote that "the history of the world is but the biography of great men." He believed that it is the few, the powerful and the famous who shape our collective destiny as a species. That theory took a serious beating this year.

To be sure, there are individuals we could blame for the many painful and disturbing things that happened in 2006. The conflict in Iraq only got bloodier and more entrenched. A vicious skirmish erupted between Israel and Lebanon. A war dragged on in Sudan. A tin-pot dictator in North Korea got the Bomb, and the President of Iran wants to go nuclear too. Meanwhile nobody fixed global warming, and Sony didn't make enough PlayStation3s.

But look at 2006 through a different lens and you'll see another story, one that isn't about conflict or great men. It's a story about community and collaboration on a scale never seen before. It's about the cosmic compendium of knowledge Wikipedia and the million-channel people's network YouTube and the online metropolis MySpace. It's about the many wresting power from the few and helping one another for nothing and how that will not only change the world, but also change the way the world changes.

The tool that makes this possible is the World Wide Web. Not the Web that Tim Berners-Lee hacked together (15 years ago, according to Wikipedia) as a way for scientists to share research. It's not even the overhyped dotcom Web of the late 1990s. The new Web is a very different thing. It's a tool for bringing together the small contributions of millions of people and making them matter. Silicon Valley consultants call it Web 2.0, as if it were a new version of some old software. But it's really a revolution.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1570743,00.html

The other day I listened to a reader named Tom, age 59, make a pitch for the American Voter as TIME's Person of the Year. Tom wasn't sitting in my office but was home in Stamford, Conn., where he recorded his video and uploaded it to YouTube. In fact, Tom was answering my own video, which I'd posted on YouTube a couple of weeks earlier, asking for people to submit nominations for Person of the Year. Within a few days, it had tens of thousands of page views and dozens of video submissions and comments. The people who sent in nominations were from Australia and Paris and Duluth, and their suggestions included Sacha Baron Cohen, Donald Rumsfeld, Al Gore and many, many votes for the YouTube guys.

This response was the living example of the idea of our 2006 Person of the Year: that individuals are changing the nature of the information age, that the creators and consumers of user-generated content are transforming art and politics and commerce, that they are the engaged citizens of a new digital democracy. From user-generated images of Baghdad strife and the London Underground bombing to the macaca moment that might have altered the midterm elections to the hundreds of thousands of individual outpourings of hope and poetry and self-absorption, this new global nervous system is changing the way we perceive the world. And the consequences of it all are both hard to know and impossible to overestimate.

There are lots of people in my line of work who believe that this phenomenon is dangerous because it undermines the traditional authority of media institutions like TIME. Some have called it an "amateur hour." And it often is. But America was founded by amateurs. The framers were professional lawyers and military men and bankers, but they were amateur politicians, and that's the way they thought it should be. Thomas Paine was in effect the first blogger, and Ben Franklin was essentially loading his persona into the MySpace of the 18th century, Poor Richard's Almanack. The new media age of Web 2.0 is threatening only if you believe that an excess of democracy is the road to anarchy. I don't.

Journalists once had the exclusive province of taking people to places they'd never been. But now a mother in Baghdad with a videophone can let you see a roadside bombing, or a patron in a nightclub can show you a racist rant by a famous comedian. These blogs and videos bring events to the rest of us in ways that are often more immediate and authentic than traditional media. These new techniques, I believe, will only enhance what we do as journalists and challenge us to do it in even more innovative ways.

We chose to put a mirror on the cover because it literally reflects the idea that you, not we, are transforming the information age. The 2006 Person of the Year issue—the largest one Time has ever printed—marks the first time we've put reflective Mylar on the cover. When we found a supplier in Minnesota, we made the company sign a confidentiality agreement before placing an order for 6,965,000 pieces. That's a lot of Mylar. The elegant cover was designed by our peerless art director, Arthur Hochstein, and the incredible logistics of printing and distributing this issue were ably coordinated by our director of operations, Brooke Twyford, and director of editorial operations, Rick Prue. The Person of the Year package, as well as People Who Mattered, was masterfully overseen by deputy managing editor Steve Koepp. Designing a cover with a Mylar window does create one unanticipated challenge: How do you display it online when there's no one standing in front of it? If you go to Time.com, you'll see an animated version of the cover in which the window is stocked with a rotating display of reader-submitted photos. Maybe you'll see yourself.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
rockymountaindem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 08:59 PM
Response to Original message
1. Way to avoid making any hard decisions
Good job, Time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 09:01 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. A once decent magazine, Go do another story on "Mary Magdelene", TIME.
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RamboLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 09:04 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. I agree - way to wuss out Time
Edited on Sat Dec-16-06 09:06 PM by RamboLiberal
though I can see their point. After all w/o YouTube Macaca Allen may have got away with his racist rift. And a cell phone camera took down and exposed Michael Richards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rockymountaindem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 09:07 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. What is it with them?
Here's what they were probably thinking...

"If we pick Kim Jong Il, everyone will say we're puffing up his ego and being bad Americans. If we pick Muqtada al Sadr, everyone will say we're siding with the terrorists. If we pick Al Gore (who I hear was in the running), imagine the shitstorm that will generate... let's just tell *everyone* how great we thing they are, that way everybody will like us and we can sell more magazines! Yeah, that's the ticket..."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shakespeare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. Man, y'all are HARSH. I happen to think that's an excellent choice, and primarily because...
...of the midterm elections. Hell, yeah, it's US. I think it's a great populist choice that emphasizes the power of community and the individual when that power is actually USED.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 09:08 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. "You control the media now, and the world will never be the same!"
Baloney, TIME.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shakespeare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 09:21 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. So you tell me who had a bigger impact on the country this year, if not the electorate.
We brought about an historic shift in political power. And that's not baloney.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kelly Rupert Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 09:26 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. I'll tell you who had a bigger impact on the events of 2006,
and that would be Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. And OBL should have won it in 2001, and Steve Jobs in 2002, and the Neocons in 2003, and Rove in 2004, and Mother Nature in 2005, and MotY is now a complete fucking joke, etc., etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shakespeare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 09:27 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. I agree with you on 2001 and 2005, not so much the others.
And I really disagree about Ahmadinejad. Perhaps in a future (near) year, but not this year.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kelly Rupert Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 09:31 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. At the beginning of this year, he was a joke.
Now, he's the dominant power in the Middle East. He's maneuvered himself into position to control Iraq and obtain a nuclear weapon (and we have little way to prevent either), and he won a proxy war against Israel in Lebanon. I'm not sure what else you need to get MotY.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shakespeare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 09:39 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. It's a little more complex a situation in Iran than that....
...and he's not a solitary tour de force, as you suggest. What's going on in Iran lately is way, way, WAY more complex than you you suggest. So, no, I still disagree that he's this year's PoTY. We'll see what the next year or two holds, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-17-06 12:35 AM
Response to Reply #10
24. And Dr. Dean's 50 state strategy
Completely reversing the control of both Senate and House.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kelly Rupert Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-17-06 12:40 AM
Response to Reply #24
26. Dean would have been another great choice. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 10:18 PM
Response to Reply #7
20. Gee, is Time giving me a column?
"WE" may be the "person of the year", but THEY have the ink and paper and the editorial choices of whom they interview, whose "story" they push...and how the public debate will be shaped..

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-17-06 12:39 AM
Response to Reply #20
25. I would read it!
Yes, I would!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Imalittleteapot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #4
18. I like your concept, but
I don't think that's what drove the "you" angle. I haven't read their explanation, have you? I'm thinking that they were too scared of Bush to name anyone who opposes him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 10:20 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. Unfortunately, that **IS** from their explanation.
Edited on Sat Dec-16-06 10:22 PM by Bluebear
# Cover Story: Person of the Year: You Yes, you. You control the Information Age. Welcome to your world.
#
# Power to the People You control the media now, and the world will never be the same. Meet the citizens of the new digital democracy
#
# The YouTube Gurus How a couple of regular guys built a company that changed the way we see ourselves
#
# People Who Mattered: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad An Interview with Iran's Agitator
#
# The Beast With a Billion Eyes On the Web, anyone with a digital camera has the power to change history
#
# Web Boom 2.0 Dotcoms are hot again. But this bubble is different from the last one. Here's how
#
# 15 Who Had Their 15 Minutes of Fame Look, it's not all their fault—some of them were just born—but here are the folks for whom there will almost surely never be another year like 2006
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onecent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 09:07 PM
Response to Original message
6. God help them if they dishonored the 'republican dumb asses" and voted
for Pelosi or Hilary or Osama...didn't he start all this shit???
Instead of YOU maybe it should have been "9/11"....that would give them more fuel for their fuckin' fire...

9/11....that's all I hear...at rumsfeld's wonderful going away party....

God I am so sick of **** and his fuckin' administration of losers!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Imalittleteapot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 09:59 PM
Response to Reply #6
19. Exactly. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 11:43 PM
Response to Reply #6
23. Gingrich got it in 1995, lets see if Pelosi gets it in 2007
She hasn't really been all that big in the news yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catchawave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 09:08 PM
Response to Original message
8. Smart choice !
:evilgrin:

Nicely written up....you're fast! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
originalpckelly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 09:28 PM
Response to Original message
12. I think it's a good idea. You didn't really read the article...
Edited on Sat Dec-16-06 09:28 PM by originalpckelly
because it was good.

I think the people who are putting Time down for doing this ought to quit being little fuckers and get over it. It's just a damn magazine already.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tinfoilinfor2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 09:44 PM
Response to Original message
15. I really didn't want this honor.
The place will be crawling with paparazzi any minute now and I'll have to put on some underwear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kstewart33 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 09:51 PM
Response to Original message
16. There are no words.
We are in the midst of a war that has worldwide consequences, about to escalate us into the Stone Age, and what does Time do?

What a piece of indescribable tripe. It's like getting a Hallmark card when you're expecting a Pulitzer.

It is us. How unbearably cute. How safe. How celeb-now.

Can't you just see the Time editorial board light up when some wet-nosed, brain-lite came up with the idea. The 'I got it!' moment.

How so emblematic of just how lame, lazy, and irrelevant our MSM has become.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 11:42 PM
Response to Reply #16
22. I would've given it to the Bush Admin last year for failure in Iraq and Katrina
I thought Bono and Bill Gates was lame although I admit it did focus on what's going on outside of the United States to a certain extent.

I'm watching the "documentary" about this on CNN and the case they make for their story is that facebook, myspace, YOUTube emerged in 2006 and thus it's a story that they can do this year but will never be able to do again. It seems like most of the people making this decision look like they are under 50 if that matters.

I think it was a lame choice as well but I'm not quite sure who I would've gone with.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
diamidue Donating Member (606 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-16-06 09:54 PM
Response to Original message
17. They won't have subscribers cancelling over this pick. n/t
I like to think they lost a few subscribers when they picked GWB in 2004.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 01:51 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC