Kudos to YouTube Debate; In Case You Were Wondering
Kudos to YouTube Debate
Adding humor, personality, awkwardness to otherwise boring and uninformative Democratic and Republican debates.
On July 23, 2007, the Democratic presidential candidates held the first ever YouTube debate. In the debate candidates responded to questions asked by YouTube video submissions made by everyday Americans. This method of question asking forced the candidates to answer questions that would not normally be asked of them. One such question given to Senator Hillary Clinton roughly asked, “Are you woman enough to run?” While a question such as this one is not very academic or issue driven, it is great that there was finally an occasion on which it could be asked. Although the debate did not bring about any groundbreaking revelations from the candidates, it was great for the Democratic Party’s image. And so, because of the issue of public image it is good to see that the Republican Party has also agreed to a YouTube debate.
In the countdown to the 2008 election, YouTube has already been the source of several videos that poke fun at candidates or catch candidates in awkward positions. The acceptance of YouTube by the Democratic candidates has helped to downplay any criticisms that have arisen because of the videos. Some candidates have even gone so far as to make their own YouTube videos. Such moves towards encouraging acceptance of a popular site of free expression develop a good political image. Republican candidates now need to take more steps in this direction.
Republicans have an image of being staunch, hard headed, and unwavering. While this image can be very powerful when a serious issue is at hand, the public likes to know that a candidate is open to and is familiar with rapidly changing cultural phenomena in the country. Since YouTube is now one of the most popular websites of both teens and adults, Republican candidates should accept nearly every opportunity they get to expose themselves and their views to the public, even if it is in an unconventional way. The fact that former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney initially turned down the opportunity to participate in the event does not bode well for their campaigns. Both of these candidates have had their character attacked numerous times, and the refusal to accept an opportunity to appear open to new things does not bolster their image. In addition, to further realize the growing acceptance and awareness of popular public trends, look at Giuliani’s most recent embarrassment in which it was prominently announced that his daughter was a member of the Obama supporters Facebook group.
However, the candidates that have
agreed to participate in the YouTube debate have taken a big step
towards a positive conservative image. The public needs to see that
their presidential candidates do not look down upon things of “ordinary
people.” The public needs to know that their presidential candidate is
a hard working American with enough sense of humor to answer a question
asked by a snowman.
In Case You Were Wondering
A few questions and answers about who we are and what we do.
Freshman: Who are you and why are you giving me this newspaper thing?
THE PRIMARY SOURCE: We’re the staff of THE PRIMARY SOURCE, Tufts’ journal of conservative thought.
F: It says that on the cover.
PS: We’re a group of students at Tufts committed to conservative ideals and causes. We publish this journal biweekly to expose other students on campus to these ideas, too. We’re an officially recognized student group – one of many you probably heard about when you took an admissions tour. We meet on Tuesdays at 9 PM in the Campus Center to discuss conservative ideas and what we’d like to publish in upcoming issues.
F: Why are you giving me this now? Aren’t I supposed to pay attention to President Bacow and the panelists running my orientation events?
PS: Let’s face it: the events you’re about to sit through are pretty long and pretty boring. Instead of letting your mind wander aimlessly or worrying about your new roommate, read a little more about Tufts and laugh at some jokes. You might even learn a little about conservatism!
F: I’m a Democrat, I’m not really interested in this right-wing stuff. Why are you wasting your money on printing magazines for me?
PS: There are a lot of places on campus where you can learn about ideas and events from a liberal perspective: professors, administrators, admissions brochures, your fellow classmates, and the list goes on. When you only hear about issues from one side, you often miss out on seeing the full picture. Even if you don’t always agree with us, consistently reading the SOURCE will enhance your education here at Tufts.
F: So what’s the real reason you’re out here? Do you hand out magazines at all major events like this to spread your message? Or is there something special about Freshman Orientation?
PS: No, we don’t normally hand-deliver issues of the SOURCE. Freshman Orientation is special, because it is designed to acclimate you to the Administration’s ideas about how you should behave when you’re here at Tufts. This isn’t all about preventing you from drinking alcohol until you’re 21 or scaring you by telling you the consequences of cheating on your homework assignments. Tufts administrators also want to tailor your behavior to their ideals of diversity, tolerance, and no hurt feelings.
F: Why would the administration do that? And what kind of proof do you have that they’re trying to change students’ behavior?
PS: Last year, two parties brought cases against THE PRIMARY SOURCE in Tufts’ judicial system, claiming harassment and the creation of a hostile environment for two separate features printed last year. The student handbook, the Pachyderm, says, “Members of the Tufts community should be able to live, study, and participate in university life as equals. Any behavior that undermines this spirit of community interferes with an individual’s growth and well-being while at Tufts.” While this might sound reasonable on its face, administrators and the Committee on Student Life (CSL) used this clause, among others, to discipline the SOURCE. The first was a parody of the Christmas carol “O Come All Ye Faithful” that, though misconstrued and used by many for political gain, targeted Tufts’ admissions policies. The second, a list of actions by Muslims perpetrated in the name of Islam, aimed at showing that not all Muslims believe their religion is as peaceful as Tufts liberals claim. Even though the CSL’s decision stated, “The Committee believes that it is important for Tufts University to foster an intellectual climate in which students feel free to express their thoughts, however controversial,” [emphasis added] they also found it possible that some published material – targeting university policies and violent interpreters of a faith – could violate Tufts University’s non-discrimination policy. The Administration uses Freshman Orientation as its first and most effective means of convincing you not to hurt anybody’s feelings during your time at Tufts. It makes it that much easier for them to run a school where parents don’t have to worry about their student’s emotional anguish while they fork over $40,000+ every year.
F: Okay, so maybe the Administration doesn’t want me to hurt anyone’s feelings. What’s so bad about that?
PS: To use a different Freshman Orientation term: academic honesty. You are here primarily to get an education. While you’re excited to party, meet new people, and move away from home, none of those truly justify the tuition bill. And the best way to learn is by debating ideas, which requires understanding multiple viewpoints regarding different issues. Not all viewpoints are nice and pretty and fun to talk about. Last year, a major topic of discussion was affirmative action. The Snyder Lecture Series, designed to bring controversial speakers to campus, hosted noted author Shelby Steele, who discussed why affirmative action harms minorities. Without this opinion, it is impossible to have an open discussion of the subject. However, many students and faculty members alike were offended by his ideas and his speech. Positing an opinion, “however controversial,” and allowing others to disagree is much different from physically coercing someone to say or do something. In a university, stifling debate prevents intellectual development.
F: I’ll have to think about that some more. I think I’m going to go play Bingo now.
PS: If you have any questions or responses to anything you read in this issue or any others, email us at [email protected]. Good luck with your game, and if you like what you’ve read so far, join us at our meetings on Tuesdays or at the barbecue on Saturday.
Comments