I was just reading on Mashable that YouTube has been voted as Time Magazine’s invention of the year. I’m not going to degrade YouTube just because I wasn’t the guy behind the scene pulling the strings, but I am wondering whether Time Magazine would have had the same thoughts about its choice had the choice not been bought by our friends over at Google for $1.65B?  Sure it’s a cool invention, but to me an invention is something that changes the world, something that make a splash on  all planes.  Time Magazine seems to make this a popularity contest rather than an actual invention contest. 

Lev Grossman goes on to explain:

It’s been an interesting year in technology. Nintendo invented a video game you control with a magic wand. A new kind of car traveled 3,145 miles on a single gallon of gas. A robot learned to ride a bike. Somebody came up with a nanofabric umbrella that doesn’t stay wet. But only YouTube created a new way for millions of people to entertain, educate, shock, rock and grok one another on a scale we’ve never seen before. That’s why it’s Time’s Invention of the Year for 2006.

I don’t doubt that YouTube has its merits for its effect on our society, but wouldn’t something like world peace or perhaps an alternative fuel or something besides a way to "grok one another"  be the most moving and inspiring invention of 2006?  Of course, if Google wants to write me a check for $1.65B I would be happy to accept the award on behalf of One By One Media.  After all, we have revolutionized the way businesses communicate with their customers.  You don’t believe me….just ask.

Tags: Mashable, YouTube, Time Magazine, Lev Grossman, One By One Media

Powered by Qumana

Sphere It