Comments on: Some Thoughts on CNN/YouTube Debate http://www.bivingsreport.com/2007/some-thoughts-on-cnnyoutube-debate/ Wed, 01 Feb 2012 22:15:29 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: Jennifer Lee http://www.bivingsreport.com/2007/some-thoughts-on-cnnyoutube-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-271630 Jennifer Lee Mon, 03 Dec 2007 05:39:59 +0000 http://www.bivingsreport.com/2007/some-thoughts-on-cnnyoutube-debate/#comment-271630 I honestly agree. I think the format was severely flawed and gave a very negative picture of the Republican party as a whole. When you look at the Democratic and Republican CNN/YouTube debates side by side it is very clear that the question selection was skewed. Honestly, I was very disappointed in CNN for this. I honestly agree. I think the format was severely flawed and gave a very negative picture of the Republican party as a whole. When you look at the Democratic and Republican CNN/YouTube debates side by side it is very clear that the question selection was skewed. Honestly, I was very disappointed in CNN for this.

]]> By: Jennifer Lee http://www.bivingsreport.com/2007/some-thoughts-on-cnnyoutube-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-313727 Jennifer Lee Mon, 03 Dec 2007 05:39:00 +0000 http://www.bivingsreport.com/2007/some-thoughts-on-cnnyoutube-debate/#comment-313727 I honestly agree. I think the format was severely flawed and gave a very negative picture of the Republican party as a whole. When you look at the Democratic and Republican CNN/YouTube debates side by side it is very clear that the question selection was skewed. Honestly, I was very disappointed in CNN for this. I honestly agree. I think the format was severely flawed and gave a very negative picture of the Republican party as a whole. When you look at the Democratic and Republican CNN/YouTube debates side by side it is very clear that the question selection was skewed. Honestly, I was very disappointed in CNN for this.

]]> By: Stephen Larson http://www.bivingsreport.com/2007/some-thoughts-on-cnnyoutube-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-271475 Stephen Larson Sat, 01 Dec 2007 22:16:17 +0000 http://www.bivingsreport.com/2007/some-thoughts-on-cnnyoutube-debate/#comment-271475 I disagree. CNN like all media I know of is in it for the money. Picking the the questions they want only makes economic sense to me. However, they do have the right to let CNN be run by some random committee? But that would be crazy. Journalists should get off their high horse on this "[common] people-powered" anything. I disagree. CNN like all media I know of is in it for the money. Picking the the questions they want only makes economic sense to me. However, they do have the right to let CNN be run by some random committee? But that would be crazy.

Journalists should get off their high horse on this “[common] people-powered” anything.

]]> By: Stephen Larson http://www.bivingsreport.com/2007/some-thoughts-on-cnnyoutube-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-313726 Stephen Larson Sat, 01 Dec 2007 22:16:00 +0000 http://www.bivingsreport.com/2007/some-thoughts-on-cnnyoutube-debate/#comment-313726 I disagree. CNN like all media I know of is in it for the money. Picking the the questions they want only makes economic sense to me. However, they do have the right to let CNN be run by some random committee? But that would be crazy. Journalists should get off their high horse on this "[common] people-powered" anything. I disagree. CNN like all media I know of is in it for the money. Picking the the questions they want only makes economic sense to me. However, they do have the right to let CNN be run by some random committee? But that would be crazy.

Journalists should get off their high horse on this “[common] people-powered” anything.

]]> By: Brian Eshleman http://www.bivingsreport.com/2007/some-thoughts-on-cnnyoutube-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-271291 Brian Eshleman Fri, 30 Nov 2007 15:02:52 +0000 http://www.bivingsreport.com/2007/some-thoughts-on-cnnyoutube-debate/#comment-271291 I agree Todd. It is just another example of the media controlling what they think we should hear, or what they want us to hear. While I think it makes sense to filter questions for relevance for debate, I like your idea of having the people vote. This way it actually forces the people to become even more engaged and let the candidates know what we want to hear about. I agree Todd. It is just another example of the media controlling what they think we should hear, or what they want us to hear. While I think it makes sense to filter questions for relevance for debate, I like your idea of having the people vote. This way it actually forces the people to become even more engaged and let the candidates know what we want to hear about.

]]> By: Brian Eshleman http://www.bivingsreport.com/2007/some-thoughts-on-cnnyoutube-debate/comment-page-1/#comment-313725 Brian Eshleman Fri, 30 Nov 2007 15:02:00 +0000 http://www.bivingsreport.com/2007/some-thoughts-on-cnnyoutube-debate/#comment-313725 I agree Todd. It is just another example of the media controlling what they think we should hear, or what they want us to hear. While I think it makes sense to filter questions for relevance for debate, I like your idea of having the people vote. This way it actually forces the people to become even more engaged and let the candidates know what we want to hear about. I agree Todd. It is just another example of the media controlling what they think we should hear, or what they want us to hear. While I think it makes sense to filter questions for relevance for debate, I like your idea of having the people vote. This way it actually forces the people to become even more engaged and let the candidates know what we want to hear about.

]]>