@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 1996
To: •••@••.•••
From: •••@••.••• (Jim Warren)
Subject: GovAccess.254.prexy: why debate online?; more media; email; ...
CONTENTS First-ever online presidential debates proposed for Feb. 5-11
WHY? ... Why Should We Care?
Ask Your Favorite Political Writers If They Will Cover the Debates;
Ask Them to Ask Campaigns If They Are Participating In *Modern* Debates
More Major Media Express Interest in Covering Online Prexy Debate
U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT's Website Will Carry Substantive Prexy Debates
NATIONAL JOURNAL Writer Would "Be Delighted" to Cover Online Debates
SAN JOSE MERCURY NEWS "Very Interested in ... Presidential Debate" ...
WESTERN NEWS SVC "Most Interested in Covering the Presidential Debates"
More About Receiving Debate Content via Email -- CALL FOR LISTSERV VOLUNTEERS
But, I Will NOT Recommend that Email Recipients Subscribe to Commercial Lists
Exchange with Political Editor for One of the Nation's Largest Newspapers
Is a Net Debate "the most useless, time consuming endeavours [one] can imagine"?
This Might Be Forbes' Campaign Manager -- No Humans Responded to Their Phones
Does *Anyone* Know How to Reach the Keyes Campaign by Voice Phone?
Finding the Collins Campaign's Contact Vectors -- No Wonder I'm Confused
Washington Post Series -- "Who's in Control?" ... and Who Cares?
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
WHY? ... Why Should We Care?
*Why* would we - on the net - want to bother with having presidential
candidates debate, online? (I.e., why am I pushing that proposal so hard?)
1. ESCALATE POLITICIANS' NET AWARENESS. It will help the candidates - and
all other professional politicians - become that much more aware of the
potential of the net for supporting political activism and citizen
participation in decisions about our own governance. This will be even
more true if the campaigns see significant public response from/to the
debates -- favorable or unfavorable.
2. IMPROVE INCUMBENTS' ATTENTION TO EMAIL. If the debate draws sufficient
positive attention and results, it will push *all* professional politicians
and incumbent elected officials that much closer to actually paying
attention to electronic mail they receive from constituents.
3. FREE VARIATION TO MEGABUCKS CAMPAIGNS. It will provide one tiny
toll-free crack in the absolute *prerequisite* that soul-selling amounts of
loot are essential for all effective campaigning. Please remember --
candidates don't grovel for special interest groups' money that the
candidates, themselves, receive. They just understand the reality that
massive loot is required to purchase the broadcast publicity and
[environmentally abusive] print and direct mail advertising that is crucial
in "old fashioned" 20th Century campaigning.
4. SET PRECEDENT FOR ONLINE DEBATES IN THE FUTURE. *If* we can push at
least most of the Republican candidates -- who say they want to lead us
into the 21st Century -- into participating in an online debate for their
primaries, this spring, it will set the precedent that the party nominees
should "certainly" conduct online debates, before November's elections.
For *every* quadrennial November.
5. ENCOURAGE PUBLIC-DOMAIN DIGITAL SIGNATURES. To the extent that I can
get the campaigns' online coordinators for the debates to include PGP
digital signatures as part of their postings -- as part of official
statements by candidates for the President of the United States -- it will
move us one step more towards acceptance of secure communications
integrity, even for Americans.
Oh ... and -- oh yes ...
6. PROVIDE PERMANENT GLOBAL ACCESS TO CANDIATES' PUBLIC COMMITMENTS. From
any place, at any time -- during the debates or years later -- anyone from
all over the world will be able to access the *exact* full text of the
candidates' statements and commitments, indexed and cross-referenced
however each recipient wishes it; archived at cooperating public sites ...
for years into the future.
No need to tune in at the appointed debate time, or set your recorder.
No need to depend on network anchors to tell you what was important.
No need to transcribe or keyboard interesting excerpts from tapes
or newspaper articles.
No need to vaguely recall a candidate's commitment at some date in
the future, but be unable to find the details.
One more tiny step towards the functional ability to easily hold
candidates accountable for their campaign commitments -- *after*
they are elected.
Will you help? NOW?!
--jim
~--<snip>--~
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~--~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~
Posted by Richard K. Moore (•••@••.•••) Wexford, Ireland
Cyber-Rights: http://www.cpsr.org/cpsr/nii/cyber-rights/
CyberLib: http://www.internet-eireann.ie/cyberlib
Materials may be reposted in their entirety for non-commercial use.
~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~--~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~
