My first reaction was something to the effect of, "Well, f***. Let's give the jerk a Nobel Prize and get it over with." But, after thinking it through, I do have to admit that he has completely revolutionized the way people use the internet. Maybe not single-handedly, as he would like us to believe, but I guess he is rather influential. But he is still a complete jerk. Jerk face.
I don't believe myspace was ever as popular as facebook is now..but I do believe its a fad just like all other social tools are and won't last for eternity. He got lucky and built the perfect social networking tool for our decade, it happens. He used his luck well though, so I give him props for some of the things that he has done. We'd like to think he didn't deserve the reward, but he most obviously did.
I don't care for Facebook, and it certainly wasn't the first of its kind, but I still have to give Zuckerberg some credit. Whatever it was that he did differently for Facebook than was done for previous social networks, it worked, and it has reached the general public in a way that few other technologies have.
Furthermore, I don't know of anything particularly immoral or unethical that he has done with his position, and he has donated and pledged quite a bit more of his money to charity and schools than most people of similar wealth.
There are definitely many others who are deserving of this title, but I see no issue with Zuckerberg winning it for this year.
So let me get this straight, Zuckerberg is POTY because he's famous? Why not just make Paris Hilton or the Kardashians POTY? I mean hell thats all our society has come down to these days, famous for being famous. There is really nothing interesting about Mark, and he has really done nothing unique or influential for the world. People login to facebook to write half sentence blurbs about how drunk they are or whaver stupid fleeting thought is passing through their heads at that moment. It's narcissism for lazy people who cant type more than 10 words. I really fail to see whats so special about facebook that any other site wouldnt already be doing without them.
Some kid rips off website. Makes billions selling out his members to corporate advertisers. Becomes youngest billionaire. Suddenly he's most interesting person on the planet? Um, no.
[citation][nom]MarkZuckerberg[/nom]So let me get this straight, Zuckerberg is POTY because he's famous? Why not just make Paris Hilton or the Kardashians POTY? I mean hell thats all our society has come down to these days, famous for being famous.[/citation]
It's not about popularity, it's about influence. While not everyone uses Facebook, it has started a revolution of sorts. Don't believe me? Look at all the news networks asking for "your" opinion through media like Twitter. Twitter wouldn't be around if Facebook hadn't succeeded. And remember, it doesn't have to be positive influence. Hitler was MOTY in 1938, not because he was popular. Not because he was good. He was MOTY because he had most affected the events of the previous year.
This is total BS. Zuckerberg may have created facebook and he may have "influenced" the life of some people, but COME ON. I bet half of those 500 million "users" are just like me, they made one just to see what all the fuss was about and, from time to time, accept a "friend" request that drops into the mail box and that's that. You can't say that's "influencing" me.
Compare that to what Assange is doing, ha and his website have completely changed the relations between most of the countries in the world and everyday we find out new things about how the US gov. is treating other governments.