by Melissa Brunner
If you're not on Facebook, you won't get it. If you are, you might nod and say, "I suppose." Time Magazine chose Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg as its "Person of the Year."
It does make sense. Facebook is something of a phenomanon. Right now, one in every 10 people in the WORLD is a user. My mom may not be one of them, but she reaps the benefits when my sisters or an aunt or a cousin passes along something learned from my status updates.
However, it could be argued that an esteemed publication such as Time should not have bowed to something so trivial as social media. And great cases can be made for the others on the short list: the Tea Party for its influence on the elections; Julian Assange, whose Wikileaks site sparked debate between national security and how much the public has a right to know; Afghanistan's leader Hamid Karzai; and the Chilean miners, whose rescue saga captivated the world.
Time says its selection is based on the person or persos who most affected our lives or the news, for better or worse. And the choice isn't always "for the better." Case in point: 1979's selection of Ayatollah Khomeini.
So what do you think? Is Zuckerberg a good choice? Who would you select? Or perhaps you're more intrigued with People Magazine's "Woman of the Year," Sandra Bullock!