YouTube Presidential Debates

I missed the previous one, but I'll be watching on Nov. 28:

http://www.youtube.com/debates.

I think it's accurate to say that these YouTube-CNN debates can be as revolutionary to elections as were the Kennedy-Nixon debates, our first televised presidential debates.

I had a chance to watch portions of the Kennedy-Nixon debates when I visited the John F. Kennedy Museum two years ago.

I was disappointed. Now, before I explain why, I have to admit that a televised debate was revolutionary in 1960 and undoubtedly changed history. So a 21st century perspective my not be able to appreciate it in the context of its times. Still, I saw disappointing parallels with today's elections. Basically, Kennedy and Nixon sounded remarkably similar to today's candidates during debates. Both played it safe. They gave nonanswers to questions: lot's of unspecific, political cliches and generalizations; few specifics on issues. In other words, they really didn't say anything.

I also expected Nixon to look like a buffoon. After all, every reference I've ever read or seen about these debates since elementary school stressed how Nixon's untelegenic performance lost him the election. Well, I hate to admit it, but I don't think he looked so awful. As I noted, in 1960 viewers may have felt differently.

So one of my conclusions from watching part of the 1960 debate is that although the presentation of presidential campaigns changed dramatically, the content of candidate dialogue and debate has not changed in nearly half a century: avoid specifics, play it safe and vanilla.

For that reason, I don't expect the YouTube-CNN debates to change the substance of the debates or election, but I expect them to dramatically change how elections are presented.

Once again, my theme: Digital technology is not improving communication, just speeding it up and presenting it differently.