2010.01.22

Michael Ignatieff puts digital in political engagement

Canadian politics became a little more digital when Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff and his staff hosted an online town hall meeting yesterday afternoon.

Mr. Ignatieff responded to 31 questions and comments during the one hour session. Not bad when you consider the amount of time it takes to receive, read, select, publish and respond to each.

I was surprised and pleased to see that the questions dealt with a wide range of issues including voting systems, poll results, legalization of marijuana, the role of youth in Canadian politics, the Alberta tar sands and (of course) prorogation. Mr. Ignatieff even gave props to the government for its handling of the Haitian earthquake.

I expected the town hall would have revolved around the Facebook group Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament (CAPP) and the rallies that group has been instrumental in organizing for this Saturday — particularly since the hour started with two questions on the subject. The fact that it didn’t either speaks to the broad spectrum of questions asked by Canadians or the careful moderation of the town hall by Mr. Ignatieff’s staff.

By the way, CAPP has 209,403 members as of the writing of this post.

It would be interesting to find out how many people registered for and actually attended the town hall, how many questions were submitted and on what topics, and which questions Mr. Ignatieff and his staff avoided — aside from the one question they accepted didn’t really answer (see the question time stamped 3:47).

An online town hall may not seem like much. I believe this represents a significant step forward by a politician to reach Canadians where they’re already gathering. Digital also represents opportunities for politicians to demonstrate fiscal responsibility by staying connected while saving travel and event costs — and maintaing some sanity in the politicians’ lives. It’s also something that can come together in pretty short order.

Coupled with his recent tour of universities, yesterday’s digital event shows that Mr. Ignatieff is committed to get young voters involved and out to the polls in greater numbers. He’ll likley pick up a few online political nomads along the way.

You can read the transcript of Mr. Ignatieff’s town hall on the Liberal Party’s website.

Photo from the online transcript.

2008.08.23

Facilitating conversation in print and online

Thank you, Dave Fleet, for drawing my attention Christie Blatchford‘s comments on blogging and online conversation.

The general public has had the ability to join the conversation at newspapers (and magazines) for years through letters to the editor even if the online community believes this to be a new phenomenon, exclusive to themselves. To their credit, editors publish letters that present both supporting and contrary points of view — just like a normal conversation would.

The process of having a letter to the editor printed includes an editorial review which selects the letters that present an intelligent argument or thought in a productive way, and may also involve the refinement of the letter in a way that includes both the author of the letter and the editor of the newspaper. There are many logical and obvious reasons for this approach including the fact that there is a finite amount of space on the printed page.

Comment moderation on a forum, blog or podcast site isn’t even a distant cousin of the newspaper approach. There is a lot of pressure in the online community to not moderate comments in favour of letting people share their uncensored, unrefined and kneejerk thoughts. Ms. Blatchford correctly points out that this typically leads to a ‘brief, ungrammatical shouting match‘.

In the race to be heard online, the favoured approach has become being the contributor that ‘yells’ the loudest — intelligible or not. Website owners would never dare to suggest working with the commenter to make their comments more productive. It’s socially unacceptable and has become an unwritten yet well known rule. Even if that approach were acceptable, most site owners don’t have the time to take that upon themselves, much less do it without consulting with the contributor.

I don’t expect that there will ever be a happy medium to this conundrum and that’s why many journalists won’t take to blogging even if their employer allows and encourages it. It may also be the reason behind the increasing number of newcomer-bloggers that don’t allow comments or provide contact information on their sites. Commenters no longer need the cooperation of the site owner since they can post their own points or counter points on their own sites.

The challenge for newspapers is to find a way to evolve their approach to conversation management from the printed page to the online world — becoming more responsive and yet still working within the ever evolving and increasingly bootstrapped revenue models.

© 2005 - 2010 Mark Blevis. Design by SnowyDay