Time Mag Wants You To Know They "Get It"

While I would not classify the "You Tube Revolution/Phenomenon/Juggernaut/Whatever" as unimportant to society at large, Time magazine's Person of the Year choice is utterly banal. Sure it recognizes some interesting reordering of influence and power in society at the margins, but the "You" that received Time's adulation are mostly youngsters doing lip-syncing or dorm-room gyrations. The trend and the sociological themes that Time's editors are letting you know they "get" are small sparks that will ignite here and there and take many years to be felt deeply in society; for now it's predominantly just entertainment.

Like I pointed out, I thought the choice was obvious. Giving $40 billion to charity is no small thing, and it is not just the number on the check. Buffett basically gave away everything, his entire life's work for benefits that will be diffuse and hard to trace back to him. If his money cures some dread disease that afflicts the Third World or expands food production in nations that are currently starving, they won't name the results after him. This was giving on an enormous scale, with total selflessness for the deepest human problems, but 'You' with your dorm room reprise of Flock of Seagulls' "I ran" wowed the editors of Time.