YouTube debate

email this story
read comments (6)
post a comment

Although there wasn't much in the way of hardball debating and there were no breakthrough moments, the YouTube format -- sometimes eccentric Average Joes asking questions instead of the usual jaded media types -- used in last night's Democratic contender debate was revolutionary. It definitely added a newly alive aura -- a sense of engagement with the pace of information and the back-and-forth of current online conversation. There were at least a couple of "whoa, that was different" moments. It should become a permanent fixture.

Lohan busted again<< previous | next >>"Stardust" trailer

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on July 24, 2007 at 11:25 AM

comment #1

T. Holly says ...

Gosh, that's all? Isn't there all this noise about how well Obama did and how badly Hilary did?

Posted by T. Holly at July 24, 2007 11:48 AM

comment #2

Stephe96 says ...

They were responding to questions sent in by a talking snowman. Way to be taken seriously. What's next? A debate with sock puppets?

Posted by Stephe96 at July 24, 2007 12:11 PM

comment #3

Howlingman says ...

"They were responding to questions sent in by a talking snowman. Way to be taken seriously. What's next? A debate with sock puppets?"

You mean they weren't sock puppets? Who knew?

The Talking Snowman and other members of the rogues' gallery kind of pegs the general voting public as a bunch of morons more interested in their 15 seconds of fame than anything else, doesn't it? Way to waste an opportunity . . .

Posted by Howlingman at July 24, 2007 1:22 PM

comment #4

christian says ...

the "debate" was pathetic. no question "chosen" about impeachment; nothing on illegal activities; and only kucinich and gravel spoke the truth. hillary claims she's "agnostic" on nuclear power. wtf? after 30 years of debate? anderson cooper is a tool.

Posted by christian at July 24, 2007 6:27 PM

comment #5