In the end, the much-anticipated CNN/YouTube Democratic Debate was, for the most part, business as usual (or as Jeffrey Toobin described it on CNN: Hillary and the Pips). Considering all the build-up perhaps what is most surprising in its aftermath is how little there is to say (not that that's stopping anyone). Sure the format of questioning was novel, but the questions themselves weren't, nor were the answers. For those of us who tuned in hoping to witness some sharp political YouTube styling a la Hillary 1984, the results were sadly disappointing. Whether this is a result of a too strict filter at CNN is not clear, however considering there were only three thousand submissions to choose from -- three thousand! -- on a site that boasts sixty-five thousand uploads a day -- one suspects what we ended up seeing was fairly representative of the whole. Yes, it's the middle of summer, and yes, election fatigue!, but still, aren't there some smart-ass high-schoolers out there with crappy summer jobs and too much time on their hands? Was the Daily Show barred from submitting an entry? Couldn't someone loop together a bunch of old Simpson episodes just to piss off Sumner Redstone?
Once or twice there was a hint of how the format could be exploited to achieve its presumed aim of putting the candidates in a place where they wouldn't be able to dodge the question. The video by the two lesbians was probably the clearest example of this, as was the father who spoke of the son he'd lost in Iraq, which makes one wonder why more submitters didn't use more images to their advantage. How about some footage of gay men dressed as soldiers as a way to question the candidates stance on the "don't ask, don't tell" policy. How about some footage of the actual candidates on the floor of the Senate in votes they'd rather not recall? How about some footage from Iraq, for that matter? Sadly, no. What we got instead was a unusually strident Anderson Cooper (although, apparently not where Hillary or Obama were concerned) and a weird dude with a gun (and yes, here's hoping he doesn't go after Joe Biden).
By far, the best "YouTube-style" videos of the night were done by the candidates themselves (John Edwards being the clear winner...take that Maureen Dowd!), which is a bit like your parents having a better facebook page than you. And then there was the always reliable Senator Gravel, who managed to fill the gaping hole left by the lack of original "YouTube-style" content, with his own wacky original content. Followed by Joe Biden, who managed not to overshadow his long-admired (by us, anyway) penchant for directness with his weakness for gaffes and longwinded answers.
In the end, one can only hope the questions for the Republican debate to be held in September are more rewarding. Between Giuliani's tenure as mayor of New York and Fred Thompson's time in Hollywood there is certainly more than enough to work with. Or maybe, in the end, it's misguided to think that YouTube will make a difference to the debates at all; perhaps we've all taken our anointment as "person of the year" so seriously there is no time our busy schedules to bother with the larger picture.