In this season’s presidential primary election debate cycles, both parties held YouTube debates, allowing users to send in video asking the candidates their questions.
The concept of taking questions from “everyday people” isn’t new; we’ve had town hall debates with questions from the audience in previous elections. However, using the internet and YouTube as the medium for asking these questions helps with accessibility (many people don’t live in Iowa or New Hampshire) and got young people more involved.
The author of the article “Of slips and video clips; Campaigning on the internet” in The Economist shows examples of how it can go either direction.
Clips of candidates “flip-flopping” or changing their stance on an issue played in rapid succession are often used as an attack by opponents or non-supporters, and don’t put the candidate in a good light. Politicians, especially those with long political careers (with countless hours of video footage for editing) can provide perfect material for these controversial videos. Example: John McCain "Double-Talk”
What effect have videos had on your opinions of the candidates this election cycle?
It should be noted that most pundits, authors, and politicians clearly acknowledge the negative effect that sites such as YouTube can have, but none have seen actual votes as a positive result of online participation in past elections.
This election cycle fund-raising has been one concrete way to measure that online participation does produce results.
In the coming election we will see if that also translates to votes. Examining exit polls will tell us whether the youth really do break records with their turnout this election. If they do, the internet will certainly be considered as one of the reasons why.