When TIME Magazine named Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg its 2010 Person of the Year, the reaction among many (including myself) was one of puzzlement: Yes, Facebook is a huge phenomenon and has arguably had a bigger impact on the day-to-day lives of many people than many a more 'serious' technology or political movement, but why now? As John Hodgman bitingly put it, "Time Magazine just named its Person of the Year 2007."
Of the other five finalists that Zuckerberg beat out, Julian Assange seems like the most deserving candidate: While WikiLeaks has been elevated to media perfect storm over the past few weeks, it's been doing far-reaching if highly controversial work for far longer than that, and it represents such a rare and crucial nexus between politics and technology, open and closed Internet, privacy and transparency: Whether one applauds it or condemns it, WikiLeaks is a thing emblematic of our times. And as Glenn Greenwald points out, "In TIME's Person of the year poll, Assange received 382,000 votes - Mark Zuckerberg received 18,000 - only 20 times less!" At that, TIME did put Assange on the cover two weeks ago.
Over the past day, there's been a lot of speculation, debate, and Internet controversy about why TIME picked Zuckerberg over Assange. Yahoo's Michael Calderone cut through the punditry bubble and asked TIME managing editor Richard Stengel point blank why the magazine made the choice that it did. Stengel didn't tread lightly: "I think Assange will be a footnote five years from now," he responded.