You love me, you really love me

Well, I really wasn't expecting this. In fact, as cliche as it sounds, it was an honor just to be nominated. But to win ... Wow.

I'm speechless.

So many people to thank, so little time. If you'll bear with me while I take one quick look at my speech ...

Wait, why is the orchestra playing? I just got up here. Oh, you mean I have to share this award with someone, and I can't hog the stage?

OK, how many co-recipients are there this year?

6.5 billion?

You've got to be kidding. No wonder the oboe player looks so tired.

You get the picture.

That mock acceptance speech is almost as silly as Time magazine's selection for the 2006 honor of "Person of the Year." The award went to: "You." A symbol, they said, of all the people using the Internet to revolutionize information gathering.

In past years the venerable designation has gone to Charles Lindbergh (first recipient, 1926), Joseph Stalin (two-time winner, 1939 and 1942) and Newt Gingrich (1995).

The award has also gone to abstractions: "The American Fighting Man" (1950), "The Generation Under 25" (1966) and "The Computer" (1982).

But this one takes the cake for absurdity.

Before I slam the selection, let me first say that I understand it. The blogosphere, user-generated content, YouTube, MySpace; they've all been titanic forces changing the way we learn about our world.

The palace doors are open, and anyone who wants to be a broadcaster or writer can be. The "one-to-many" methods of spreading the news requiring editors, fact checkers, broadcasting equipment all may be dying a slow death.

And all those stodgy, old-fashioned news outlets like ... ahem ... the newspaper should be shaking in their boots.

I get it. It's a paradigm shift.

I'll even admit that the information used in this article on previous winners of "Person of the Year" was taken from a Wikipedia page on the subject. That means the proverbial "you" possibly sitting around in "your" underwear and with or without a "degree" actually helped create this article.

I think that's great.

But that doesn't change my opinion of the award. Because it's fine to celebrate all the "yous" out there; the only problem is many of them might be too busy celebrating themselves to take notice.

Take YouTube, for example.

There are more clips there of people lip-syncing a favorite song than performing in a band. Immensely more clips of people staring into a webcam talking about themselves than doing anything constructive or entertaining.

Finally, there are more clips of users' pets (more than 35,000) than there are of their grandparents (roughly 10,000).

In fact, the top star produced by YouTube in 2006, Lonelygirl15, was a solitary actress peering into the camera and talking about her depression, her parents and her isolation.

Naval gazing sure is a great pastime.

Does this "Me"Tube crowd really need another pat on the back?

I say no. It's great that Web 2.0 lets people express themselves. It would be even greater if they had something more to say than "nobody understands me."

TJ Greaney is a staff reporter for the Southeast Missourian