For the first time ever, Democratic presidential candidates debated by answering questions submitted through YouTube. The questions were vetted by CNN, and the debate was moderated by Anderson Cooper. Predictably, some questions were wacky, some a biting critique of politics in America, and some just pretty good.
NPR had a ton of sound bites, and interviewed an enthusiastic blogger who said this was basically the best thing ever to happen in the history of the world. I agree that it’s nice to have questions coming from everyday people, but I think it’s important to keep in perspective the level of discourse that is possible on YouTube. Have you ever read YouTube comments? They are to blogging what the National Enquirer is to the New York Times.
Defective Yeti imagines what it would have been like if the candidates had responded like YouTube commenters:
SEN. CHRISTOPHER DODD: omg that video was totaly gay
SEN. BARACK OBAMA: Shut up Dodd thats offensive when u say gay like that.
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: to answre your question bush is a facist who only wants more power. hes not even the president you knopw, cheny is. i would b different because i would have a vice presidant that doesnt just try and control everything from behind the seens/
I think this was a cool way to do the debate, since everything will be online for easy reference later (e.g. to follow up on campaign promises). I don’t know that it’s revolutionary, since CNN still screened the questions they way they would in a live debate. Since the level of discourse on YouTube is generally so low, I don’t think you could do it any other way. CNN did seem to have a fairly high tolerance for goofiness, as long as a substantial question underlay the snowman or folk song or whatever appeared in the video.
What do you think? Will the republicans do it, and how will their constituents react?
Update: Mark Elrod, an actual political scientist (and one of the few vocal democrats at my alma mater) says:
Overall, I think the novelty of the event detracted from the substance of what the candidates actually had to say. link
I wonder if CNN chose to use YouTube because it feels more democratic than, say, having people write to CNN with their questions.
The “open forum” style discussions (at the Presidential candidate level) will always require screening. Otherwise it would turn into a mess.
The only other democratic option would be to have the country first vote on what questions are asked. And that would be a bit over-the-top.
Couple of things about this debate:
1. I don’t see any difference in the way this was done from the usual way. Even though ordinary people submit the questions, professional moderators still sifted through all of them and made selections based on their own judgment. I have to believe that they just picked the questions that they themselves would have asked. I would have had used YouTube itself, via the ratings system, produce a list of the top 20 questions as voted on by YouTube users. Then I’d have the producers select only from the top 20. That gives the general public more power to select the questions. As it was, the public could *create* the questions but not select them, which seems counterproductive to the whole idea.
2. If I were a Democrat candidate, I would start taking one YouTube question per day which did not make it into the televised debates, and posting up a video response to it on my own YouTube channel, and continuing each day until the general election (whether or not I won the primary).
Robert-
Great ideas. I think it is crucial to hear what questions people want answered, because that sets the entire direction of the debate.
Otherwise, this isn’t democracy in action, it’s simply crowdsourcing - relying on YouTubers to create entertaining, homebrew videos that make the debate more fun to watch, but no more substantive.
Actually, I’m not sure if YouTube itself is the best forum for the actual voting on questions. While I agree that it’s nice to have the content submitted that way, most of the people who vote and comment on YouTube are idiots (or, possibly, just not very mature). Yes, that’s harsh, but read the comments on just about any video and you’ll see plenty of evidence.
Yes, one look at the average comment thread on a YouTube video will get you seriously wondering about the IQ level of YouTube users. On the other hand, I think it would make a major impact on me, just as a voter, to see a Democrat be able to take a stupid question and then treat it with respect and answer it as well as s/he could. Too many Dems just seem to be dismissive of anybody who isn’t up to their personal standards of education or intelligence, which seems ironic for a “Democrat”.