Are Blogs Good For Democracy? A Debate Featuring The Yale Political Union

Arianna Huffington recently spoke before the Yale Political Union at a debate around the question, "Resolved: Blogs Are Good For Democracy." While Arianna argued that blogs support democracy inasmuch as bloggers can challenge conventional wisdom — a cornerstone of American democracy going as far back as Thomas Paine — the students in the Yale Political Union engaged in a spirited debate about the role blogs and bloggers play in a democratic society. The resolution passed, 33-22.

In honor of that debate, and to bring that dialogue to the Huffington Post, we have featured four students' speeches from that night.

Fernando Reyes' post, Blogging Towards A Digital Democracy, highlights "the real possibility that individuals that have been empowered now have the tools to break through the ignorance that is possible by physical separation."

Kate Maltby's post, Why Blogs Are Bad For Democracy, argues that "the deeply personal nature of blogs, in combination with the echo chamber effect, has fueled the rise of single issue campaigning," which inherently hurts our democracy.

David Broockman discusses the Left's intellectual tradition of deconstructing complex issues but argues that "Blogs Trample On Leftist Traditions" in his post.

And Leah Anthony Libresco argues that "blogs do improve democracy, not by giving the authors a forum to express their ideas, but by giving ordinary citizens access to the ideas they care most about" in her post, titled, "A Well-Informed Citizenry, Being Necessary To The Liberty Of A Free State..."

Please read the students' posts and share your thoughts in the comments.

Comments

[Interested Party]

Huffington Post should take better care, for example featuring Madeline Albright but nothing she said, just the photo. And why give so much ink/space to Sarah Palin?

[TheGeicoCaveman]

!!!! WATCH McCain and Cindy LIE to AMERICA about not going negative !!!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60k9IZ1LRC0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2BA_9QJRrE


* And a FREE BONUS The 2006 vetting of Sarah Palin*
a 63 page report
THEY DON”T WANT YOU TO SEE THIS!!

http://mudflats.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/palin-2006-vetting.pdf

[UCSD101]

Great isn't it?

Now see this:

Posted by: unite4change

NEWT GINGRICH - GEORGE WILL,
Palin not ready, (prepared) for Katie Couric interview – but preferred by Newt over Obama to be President.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=luwqRA0GWGc

Clearly it's got to be OBAMA-BIDEN 2008

[Truth4Voters]

I can't believe the answer isn't obvious. Of course it is. Are we to rely on MSM for straight answers? They have already proven they can be bought. The Price? The price is access.

[BlaryFnorgin]

Access is an issue because of blogs. In the past, politicians needed journalists to spread their message, so they had to submit to questioning. Now, there's so much competition among media outlets that politicians are in a position to strong-arm news organizations. It used to be that politicians competed for access to media outlets, and as a result they had to submit to questioning.

Plus, now you get to choose your truth like you're shopping or something.

[BlaryFnorgin]

Serious journalism is drowned out by a cacophony of B.S. Truth becomes relative. People trained to examine facts and present useful information clearly are thrown into the same arena with random jerks and idiots.

Blogs are good only if you accept Fox New's fundamental assertion--that professional journalism is a myth and perspective is all that matters.

I'm a Democrat, bogey.

[SamEllison]

The NYTimes serious journalists and editors sat on news for years.
If not for blogs it still would not have reported the truth.

[BlaryFnorgin]

What news? Be specific.

[PackyJ]

You betcha that Blogs aren't good for a maverick democracy because they abuse that "freedom of speech thing" and such that the troops are fightin' for. And also.

[bogey12]

Mostly I'm surprised there were only 22 republicans in the group.

[PuppaX]

Lol...nice!

[turfkiller]

They are not debating if blogs are good for democracy but how to make money on them and get them under the control of corporations like the mainstream media...

[hypnotoad72]

It's always about making money.

What we need to do is use our God-given skills to make money, which in turn makes our country prosper. (I ought to curtail my time blogging too; so many articles are so negative just for the "fun" of it that it'll lead people in to depression or worse.)

[turfkiller]

They are not debating if blogs are good for democracy but trying to figure a way to charge everyone and get them in the control of the corporations just like mainstream media.

[BannedInBoston]

What a dumb debate question. You'd think Yale could do better. What, somebody is going to take the completely id.iotic negative side?

[robXdion]

Yale seems to pride themselves on examining the obvious in some lame attempt at intellectual complexity.

[davidbroockman]

Hey there.

I think in general I agree with blogs being good for democracy, but even on "obvious" questions there are almost always negatives along with the positives. I'm interested as to your thoughts on my argument.

David

[tempting]

http://www.linktv.org/specials Check out these issues before you make up your mind.