According to Time magazine, yes.

The newsmagazine announced its person of the year early this morning, and skipped over individuals like Gabrielle Giffords, Newt Gingrich or Hillary Clinton in favor of the protester.

As the magazine explained:

"Massive and effective street protest" was a global oxymoron until — suddenly, shockingly — starting exactly a year ago, it became the defining trope of our times. And the protester once again became a maker of history."

Some people might just think of the Occupy protesters who have made headlines across the United States. But worldwide, of course, there were protests that toppled governments and sowed the seeds for massive change.

Tunisia, Egypt, Syria all were the sites for life-changing protests.

Do you agree with this choice? Or do you think there's an individual who would have made a better selection? Time magazine is not the arbiter of what matters and what doesn't, but its choices for Person fo the Year have often generated heated discussions.

The magazine began its tradition in 1927, when it was called the Man of the Year. That changed to Person of the Year only in 1999.

Among the winners in years gone by: Henry Kissinger, the Apollo 8  (--I stand corrected; Gerald Ford was never named) astronauts, every American president since Franklin Delano Roosevelt and last year's winner, Mark Zuckerberg.