Proving once again the irrelevancy of dead-tree media, the incapability of MSM editors to make a decision about the value of individual efforts, and the difference between movers & shakers, and those who are temp hirelings, Time magazine decided everyone online is or are the person/people of the year.

What pablum-foisting.

I don’t mind the concept of multiple winners, but such a large group is beyond any defense. Is an Atrios the same as a MySpace teen discussing homework? Is Arianna Huffington no more a leader than an indie rock band that sings about heartbreak? Is John Amato of Crooks & Liars really the equivalent in contribution as a YouTuber shooting bottle-rockets from his anus?

The issues of the year in the public mind would have to be the Iraq War, Darfur, Avian Flu, Corruption in Politics, The Democratic Election Sweep, the influence and entertainment of YouTube, and the impact of the Netroots. Yes, it’s hard to narrow the issues down to one, unless you take the time to project both the short and the longterm impact of each.

Doing that would likely distill the list to the Iraq War (or maybe, Middle East foreign policies), Darfur, Net-enabled Direct Democracy and the Democratic takeover of Congress. Clearly, Time’s editors thought the middle one was part of a bigger phenomenon, then decided no-one represented it smaller than a group of hundreds of millions.

It’s too hard, picking….

Were there really no leaders in any group to define the year?

The Iraq War

The Person of the Year doesn’t always highlight the nicest guy, but the one with the most impact. So it could be Moqtada al-Sadr. The Decider-in-chief. The Neocons. Or The Insurgents.

Darfur

The leader of Sudan would be the best pick here. Isn’t it time the world starts recognizing the leader of a genocide?

Net-enabled Direct Democracy

Why shrink from the reality that some bloggers took the lead in active advocacy and election innovations? Chris Bowers of MyDD (and co-bloggers). Jane Hamsher & friends at Firedoglake. Markos Moulitsas Zuniga. John Amato of Crooks & Liars. Patriotboy of Jesus’ General. Even if you add another dozen national blogs, and several state ones like BlueOregon, you can still come up with a list of 30 or 40, very representative leaders of the 100 million.

Why would Time avoid doing so? Perhaps they don’t want to admit that the effective Netroots was left of center?

The Democratic Takeover This would be a pretty easy one, too. They could highlight the Democratic leaders who made it happen, like Howard Dean and Rahm Emmanuel. Better, they could list The Discounted Democrats that stood out for taking over Republican strongholds or for running unconventional campaigns. That would mean Tester, Webb, McInerney, Space, Gillibrand, Shea-Porter, and another handful.

Time Magazine has lost the edge it once had, and their selection this year exemplifies it perfectly. In fact, with Dan Rather and Tom Brokaw retired as anchors and Peter Jennings dead, I wonder if a national poll would indicate how few news anchors of major news networks are recognized by a majority of Americans anymore. Given the sad state of the Mainstream Media, the MSM could have been chosen as the Losers of the Year.

And Time would certainly be its leader. The only thing about Time that grants it anything distinctive anymore is this annual selection. And now, they’ve blown their principal schtick.

Update: William Beutler of Blog P.I. found Time’s decision so predictable that he called it back in October! And August Pollack concurs with the blahness of the selection. Which makes Newsweek the likely winner of the Online Newsmagazine of the Year. Time magazine is so out of the running that a virtual parakeet would be reluctant to drop a virtual bird-turdy on it if it was used to line its virtual cage.

Virtual parakeets, after all, care about their cred.