FALL DEBATES SEEM LIKELY TO MUTE CITIZEN VOICES

Taking Note

Michael Cornfield

A ugust 11, 2008

Last week, the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) announced a new partnership with MySpace, the social networking giant.  I’d hoped that this meant the Internet would be wired into the debate formats so as to give citizens more direct access to the candidates and nation.  Alas, the online citizenry has for the most part been restricted to its customary seats in the non-speaking sections.  The organizers intend to provide voters with "education" and "information," not access and conversation.

MySpace CEO Chris DeWolfe is quoted in the news release as being “committed to creating an environment that creates [sic] higher levels of civic engagement.”  MySpace has indeed pursued that goal.  Its recently concluded contest held with MSNBC afforded citizens the chance to win a credentialed slot covering the political conventions.  Anyone over 18 could submit a video and vote for a favorite.  Two winners were selected out of more than 50,000 entrants. 

But citizens who want to ask a question of the major party nominees during a presidential debate will have to go through moderator Tom Brokaw and the others in charge of the town meeting segment of the second debate.  Email only, please; no videos.

That’s a shame.  We’ve learned this campaign cycle that self-produced web videos are great vehicles for citizen expression.  The CNN/YouTube debates were a civic high point of the campaign cycle.  Yes, some of the videos were silly.  But one of them started a national discussion about the propriety of a new president meeting with leaders of hostile nations.  And the variety of topics, perspectives, and tones attested to the rightful involvement of voters in the candidate questioning process.  The people are, in aggregate, better informed about the state of the nation than any panel of questioners.  The sight of them posing questions sets an inspiring example for getting involved in the national campaign discussion.  And, oh yes, the people are constitutionally established as sovereigns of our democratic republic.

Of course, in putting this quadrennial show together the CPD must defer somewhat to the wishes of the national parties and candidates. The CNN/YouTube debates were held back in the pre-primary phase, when there were too many candidates with too little power to dictate format considerations.  Today, it appears that debate formats are one aspect of public life where the Obama campaign favors continuity and not change.  The McCain campaign has seemed more open to more debates and format experimentation.

One big opportunity for citizens remains available: A coalition of Louisiana and New Orleans organizations and government officials have joined Google and its YouTube division in offering to stage a presidential debate outside the CPD aegis in the Crescent City on September 18.  However, although neither campaign has issued a final rejection of the invitation, prospects are dimming.

Meanwhile, the architecture of the Internet leaves open the possibility that an American could launch a question that would get responses from the candidates via some combination of eloquence, timing, organizational push, celebrity pull, and blogosphere buzz.   If Paris Hilton can be heard on energy policy –and make sense relative to what the candidates have said on the subject lately—there’s more than one way to be a part of the presidential discourse.

One more point: the CPD/MySpace news release promises that poll questions will pop up via “issue icons” on the web stream version of the debates.  That’s a terrible idea.   Posting the running results from a self-selected semi-attentive sample of debate viewers will be an act of public dis-information.  Janet Brown (CPD’s stalwart principal) et al: lose this, please!