View Full Version : GOP candidates to field YouTube queries with edgy race undecided

November 28th, 2007, 08:13 AM
GOP candidates to field YouTube queries with edgy race undecided

The Sunshine State takes center stage Wednesday night in the race for the White House as eight Republican presidential candidates face off in the party's first CNN/YouTube debate.

With five weeks and one day to go until the first votes are cast in the race for the White House, the stakes could hardly be higher.

The candidates will be fielding video questions submitted by the public via the YouTube Web site, just as Democratic White House hopefuls did in July.

From here (http://edition.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/11/28/debate.preview/index.html).

Anybody going to watch it?

November 28th, 2007, 08:21 AM
From here (http://edition.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/11/28/debate.preview/index.html).

Anybody going to watch it?This is one of the few times I miss cable TV. I would like to see it but not at the price.

Pagan Warrior
December 1st, 2007, 01:07 AM
This is one of the few times I miss cable TV. I would like to see it but not at the price.

SSanf ... hopefully you've taken me off your ignore list because here is a link to where you can watch ALL of the debates online (even the YouTube one):


December 1st, 2007, 09:38 PM
This is a good use of YouTube - I would approve of something similar being used in Britain to carry election broadcasts and get a discussion going with politicians contributing and answering questions directly rather than hiding behind the press and limiting access to their personal interactions with voters. I registered an account in my own name (rather than using my MUP, which was getting too many questions into its inbox when I outed myself the other week) in advance :):);).

The Internet is shaping up to be a big tool in dissemination of election prop...sorry, literature and since political adverts aren't allowed on TV and you can't leave a comment or rating after a Party Election Broadcast on BBC1 as you can on YouTube it would be a good idea to get people interested in politics again, particularly the users of the system, who tend to be the people who switch off the TV and switch on the computer and thus don't watch the PEBs when they go out.

I don't approve of wasting party money on Facebook networks (they are shallow and attract the usual suspects among the technically-literate networking elite while diverting funds from better projects like proper policy research) or the dire and silly "Webcameron" that my leader puts out, but YouTube is one of the better sites to have come out in the last few years since 2005 and should be exploited by politicians.

December 2nd, 2007, 07:33 PM
I watched it. It was fairly well done.

HedwigHarfang, political advertising on TV is allowed here, and I'd rather it weren't. It invariably devolves into slick packaging and name-calling, and has nothing to say about actual issues.

December 2nd, 2007, 09:42 PM
Banon - that's why I fear it being legalised here. Political parties are dependent on voluntary donations and fundraising and are perpetually overdrawn (that is why for the last two years we have been engulfed in the cash-for-honours scandal, which included me at one stage and I'm glad to say that I was cleared, though not without a week's worth of unreported torture or me and others and insinuations in one broadcast that I was living in a very nice part of London supposedly on a backbencher's salary of 60k which is not enough to afford the house pictured in the broadcast!). For smaller parties to keep up with the trends and compete with the larger ones would be impossible if a free-for-all were allowed. The Labour Party for a start gets huge donations from the unions and other community groups and the Tories tend to rely on cake stalls at the local fete because our membership is more fragmented and is less activist in nature. Both parties claim the other is richer because of XYZ or ABC, but in reality the Labour Party has always had the benefit of a union tithe and since even nowadays a lot more people are members of unions rather than political parties, the funding from that source outstrips our revenue from big industrialists or corporate bodies, whose money usually follows the party in government or ahead in the polls anyway.

Here we have a system whereby each party gets a slot just before or after the national news to put a five minute "advert" out during election campaigns. Mostly nowadays they are indistinguishable from commercial advertisements, but usually party leaders speak directly to camera and explain their policies, and after major annual events like the Budget the Opposition gets a five minute slot to put across what they would do instead - just the Shadow Chancellor speaking to camera or mic to explain their party's policy and reaction. Broadcast rules are pretty strict in terms of coverage of party activities during an election campaign, but there are so many ways to get round this that most of it is now a complete joke.

I would however like to see YouTube broadcast them and for comments to be allowed as I think it would get politicians like me to actually engage directly with the voters themselves. Broadcast and print media are necessarily one-way transmission, but the internet, blogging, message boards and sites like YouTube have opened up a huge new possibility for politicians to field direct questions from members of the public and I happen to be in the vanguard of this by posting here on MW. I wish others would follow suit, we might understand more about David Cameron and Gordon Brown and what they have been doing for the last six months because I can't think of any occasion on which anything they say or do has made a difference to the people they rule and it might be interesting to see how they fare on a YouTube or internet message board live chat.

If I got back into a position where I was calling the shots, I would make all my senior cabinet ministers spend:

- one hour a day posting on a general news message board (e.g. eBay Round Table, ISP boards like Tiscali or AOL, Lycos, etc) under their own names.
- half an hour posting on the above under a MUP which put the other point of view across. (A different system, so the SoS who posts on Tiscali would MUP on eBay and vice versa.)
- half an hour answering direct questions about their policy briefs on a forum on their departmental websites, obviously under their own names.

It wouldn't be too onerous because the Secretary of State is responsible for policy and not direct administration, so making it part of their job to directly engage with the public for a while would be an antidote for the remoteness and isolation which we find ourselves in in the Westminster "village". I have often longed to do this but feared how seriously I might be taken, and sometimes have posted under MUPs just to spend a few hours relaxing after a hard day in Parliament. Given that I have been taken at face value here at least (I post on a few forums relating to Louise's interests in the political section - to engage with the next generation - and on at least one have sparked a whole sub-forum dedicated to what I've been posting in the last day or two :):):D) I wish I had done it sooner.