Personal Democracy Plus Our premium content network. LEARN MORE You are not logged in. LOG IN NOW >

Commission on Presidential Debates Boldly Goes to Web 0.2, Launches a Dud

BY Micah L. Sifry | Wednesday, August 6 2008

This morning, the Commission on Presidential Debates and MySpace are announcing "MyDebates.org,," a "landmark partnership" that they claim "will do for the debates what TV did in 1960 for the Nixon Kennedy election." [The release they emailed around yesterday said there was a 5am PST embargo on this news, but given that their press release is now live on the web at http://www.myspace.com/mydebates, I figure they've broken their own embargo.] Their joint press release says this new site "will offer a host of interactive tools for viewers to virally engage in the political process." The release notes that "marks the first time that the CPD has paired with an Internet property to include online functionality into the event series and traditional debate format."

So, what are the "landmark" functionalities we're about to be treated to?

Visitors to the site will have the option of downloading a personalized application which, during the debates, will stream the television event live from the embed location (e.g. within a blog, social network, or website). The application will also provide users with an on-demand playback functionality as well as issue-based tracking, allowing users to track a candidate’s stance on issues they care about throughout the live stream. The full functionality will be available in the days leading up to the first Presidential debate on Friday, September 26.

Additionally, ‘MyDebates.org’ will feature high-quality video streaming and as the candidates are speaking, “issue icons” will light up as candidates discuss specific main topics. Users will be polled periodically throughout the debates with short questions with multiple choice answers (or iconic responses, e.g. thumbs-up/ down). This format will reduce distraction while eliciting specific and valuable feedback.

Translation: You can use a MySpace widget to stream the live video of the debate on your own site. Someone will tag the video content with some kind of icon-like issue tags, just in case you want to rewind to watch something again. And invisible pollsters will have the opportunity to poll viewers using this widget, for use in ways that you will have absolutely no control over.

Oh and there's one more bone: "The second Presidential debate, in a Town Hall format, will take place on Tuesday, October 7. ‘MyDebates.org’ will provide the Web platform through which Americans will submit questions which may be presented to the candidates during this event." I like that use of "may be presented." We wouldn't actually want to promise anything, would we?

That's it. This is pathetic. It's like saying, "I just bought a synthesizer and all I can think to do with it is play Chopsticks."

I don't fault MySpace for this travesty so much as I fault the Commission, for lack of imagination and courage. Recall that at least the MySpace/MTV forums during the primaries included real-time feedback from viewers that the audience could see, and the candidates even saw the aggregated responses, in real time. Also recall that Google/YouTube and the City of New Orleans have been offering their services for a candidates forum on September 18, and surely something creative could have come of that.

What they're offering us here is little more than live video streaming, which is like, so, year 2000. When you consider what YouTube and CNN did in the past year, along with what MySpace and MTV did, as well as what we did with 10Questions.com--in each case to expand voter participation in debates and in some cases open new kinds of feedback loops, you have to admit this is really disappointing. Honestly, it would almost be better if they didn't bother to include MySpace. (And one might want to ask, why only MySpace when plenty of other sites and services could provide this video service?)

Says Janet Brown, Executive Director of the Presidential Debate Commission, “Our educational partnership with MySpace builds on the unique power of digital media to further engage voters on the issues and help ensure their voices are heard in new and effective ways." She added, "I’m confident that this is the best way for new media to intersect with the general election Presidential debates."

"Best way"? This is depressing and should generate outrage. At a moment when we can start thinking seriously about Rebooting America and opening up the political process in all kinds of creative ways, the best the CPD could come up with was this? (In fairness, we should also blame the McCain and Obama campaigns, who no doubt told the CPD that they didn't really want any significant changes to what has become a very reliable and controlled format for the TV debates.)

I have to say, though, that while I'm outraged, I'm not surprised. The Commission on Presidential Debates has long been, along with the Electoral College, one of the more archaic and anti-democratic elements of the presidential election process. But unlike the Electoral College, the CPD isn't enshrined in the Constitution and has no particular claim on legitimacy. It is in fact a private entity that was created by the two major parties in 1986 (its founding chairmen were then-RNC chair Frank Fahrenkopf and then-DNC chair Paul Kirk) to supplant the longstanding role of the League of Women Voters as a nonpartisan forum for presidential debates.

Both parties had reasons to be upset with the League for its honorable insistence on inviting a third-party candidate to the 1980 debates, independent John Anderson. And so they foisted themselves on the process, began taking corporate sponsorships to pay for the debates, and established arbitrary criteria for who could or couldn't be included in them. As a creation of the two major parties, the CPD has also been much more subservient to the interests of the presidential campaigns, giving them tremendous leverage over the content and style of the actual events. Since the Commission took over, the so-called "Spin Room" for post-debate media-massaging has been actually institutionalized, with a large arena next to the press holding pen prominently labeled "Spin Room."

Now they're giving us a shack and asking us to call it a "landmark." Feh. Please wake me when it's over.

News Briefs

RSS Feed friday >

Slovenian ambassador apologizes for signing ACTA, Poland halts ratification

Apparently, some EU countries are reconsidering their support to ACTA, only a week after signing the agreement.
Helena Drnovsek Zorko, Slovenia's ambassador to Japan, has in fact issued a public apology to her country for signing it. Meanwhile, Poland Prime Minister Donald Tusk says he's halting the ratification process of the international treaty.
Last week people took the streets in Poland, and a protest is planned in Ljubljana tomorrow. GO

yesterday >

Did Newt Gingrich Lose Florida for Want of a Better API?

Slate's Sasha Issenberg has a great story outlining one narrative about Newt Gingrich's loss in Florida: He inspired a group of tech-savvy volunteers, but gave them no way to plug in to the campaign. GO

House GOP Hosts Legislative Data and Transparency Conference

Today, House Republicans are hosting a conference on legislative data and transparency. The goal, as it's been explained to me, is to set the table for a conversation between House leadership and open government/open data advocates about what the House could or should do next.

More information on the conference is here. It's being live streamed.

GO

When House Republicans Aren't Winning With Transparency

House Republicans have been pushing the results of their transparency initiatives, such as a pilot project to archive video of some committee hearings.

But other committee hearings are apparently off-limits. Politico reports today that documentary filmmaker Josh Fox was arrested while attempting to videotape a House Science Committee hearing on hydrofracking. Only credentialed members of the Congressional press corps can film hearings of that committee.

The archived webcast of that hearing, which was streamed live, is here, if you can get the software to work. Each committee chair has discretion over what to do with video of their hearings, although there's also an office of in-House broadcasters who keep archival footage of everything, staffers have told me previously. As a result, there's no universal standard for how hearings are streamed or archived. The Science Committee uses a content delivery platform powered by Akamai.

GO

Komen's Planned Parenthood Decision Raising Eyebrows Online

Online campaigns have begun to organize in response to news that the breast cancer group Susan G. Komen for the Cure would be cutting its financing to Planned Parenthood for breast cancer screening and education programs. According to the news reports, Komen says the decision is not in response to pressure from anti-abortion groups, as Planned Parenthood alleges. Rather, a spokesperson told the A.P., the main factor is a new rule adopted by Komen that prohibits grants to organizations being investigated by local, state or federal authorities. Currently, Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) is looking in to how Planned Parenthood spends and reports its money. "Susan D. Komen" has been trending on Google since yesterday. GO

Team Obama Spends Big On Digital

There's more to come from recently filed campaign finance reports from the presidential campaigns. Meantime, Politico notes that Barack Obama's re-election effort has so far spent $2.2 million in online advertising, millions more on payroll and $809,000 on computer equipment and software. GO

tuesday >

Romney Campaign to Test Out Square Tonight

As Nick Bilton noted last night, the Mitt Romney campaign plans to test out Square for fund-raising at a Florida event tonight. A spokeswoman for Barack Obama's re-election campaign told us yesterday that Obama campaign staffers and select volunteers around the country would be getting the devices, which attach to mobile phones and work as credit card readers, as well as custom software that collects the information necessary for donations to be compliant with Federal Election Commission requirements.

Update: Now with screenshots!

GO

How Much Should a Campaign Know About an Online Volunteer?

Rick Santorum's campaign is asking folks to go online and make calls today on the former senator from Pennsylvania's behalf. Earlier this morning I noted that Mitt Romney's team is doing the same.

One ongoing discussion around this type of tool is how much the campaign should know about the volunteer before the volunteer is allowed to, well, volunteer. Mitt Romney's campaign just asks for a name and email address. Santorum's campaign requires volunteers to put in a full address before it starts revealing to users of their click-to-call tool the names and phone numbers of prospective voters. It's an additional step to protect voters' privacy — and to get more data for the campaign — although it isn't difficult for tricksters to use a fake or inaccurate address in a form like this.

GO

More