President Obama will take questions from the public today in an online town hall meeting called, "Open for Questions"
(White House screenshot)Photos (1 of 1)
Going online with Obama: Will he play fair?
By Jimmy Orr | 03.26.09
Harnessing the Internet to empower citizens is what government should do.
So the announcement that President Obama will answer questions from the public in an online video town hall today is good news.
A skeptic might be forgiven for being suspicious, since it is all too easy for White House press aides to pick and choose from the questions and relay softballs to the President.
I speak from experience on this topic. As the Internet director for President George W. Bush and Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, I created similar online forums. “Ask the White House” for President Bush. And the creatively titled, “Ask the Governor” for Governor Schwarzenegger.
President Obama’s “Open for Questions” is an improvement to both. It’s not perfect, but it’s an improvement.
Here’s why…
WhiteHouse.gov
“Ask the White House” was great for its time. For more than five years, cabinet secretaries, senior White House officials, and appointees throughout the administration answered emails from the public in a live, online chat setting on average of three times per week.
It wasn’t a video Q & A like the one Obama will be participating in today. But it’s the same concept. Live. Real time. Emails from the public. Answers from the guest.
The big difference is that the White House controlled the event. The host got to choose the questions. White House officials were always encouraged to take the tougher questions — and they did. But, still, the choice was in the hands of White House aides.
Governator
Governor Schwarzenegger raised the bar. When “Ask the Governor” began in 2006, he did what President Obama will do today. He sat in front of the cameras answering questions from the public that were emailed in. Live video. Real time.
Reporters moderated. They could select any question that came in. To make it even more legitimate the reporter had the option of dismissing the emails entirely and asking whatever he or she wanted.
For communications professionals, this was risky ground — losing control of the message. Schwarzenegger, however, could hold his own.
More transparency
What makes “Open for Questions” promising is its apparent transparency. Not only can you submit your own question, but you can see the other questions submitted. And you can vote on what questions are best.
That means that if you can organize a group of people to all vote on your question, it will rise to the top.
It’s not perfect. The interface is clunky. It only allows you to see 10 questions at a time instead of sorting through many like you would see on Digg. And when you are talking about 90,000+ questions, this doesn’t work.
But because there is more transparency, it holds the White House more accountable. It wouldn’t be wise to bypass the popular questions.
Sure, a legion of Obama supporters could all sign up and vote on the questions the administration would most want to answer. But nothing would stop opponents of the president from doing the same thing.
It’s an online get-out-the-vote.
Improve
One problem: The moderator leaves something to be desired. Nothing against Joe Biden’s chief of staff, but he’s internal. He’s going to select the questions. It would be better if the White House brought in Bill O’Reilly and Chris Matthews to moderate (think of the entertainment value too).
Again, the White House will get a lot of heat if Obama selects all softballs. And they’ll never cover the event again. As time went by, “Ask the White House” generated less and less coverage.
Marijuana
We’ll see which ones are selected. Right now, two of the three top questions are about legalizing drugs. Phil asks:
“President Obama, Do you plan on letting Science end the failed “War” on Marijuana for personal and medical use thus taking the strain off our prisons and police forces so that we no longer have to arrest over 800,000 non violent drug offenders?”
The town hall gets underway at 11:30am (ET). To participate, click here.
——
While you’re at it, click here to follow us on Twitter!
<< Budget czar downplays differences between Congress and Obama | MainComments
2. Ken Wagner | 03.26.09
Your budget proposal is larger than all of the budgets combined from George Washington to George W Bush. Why is it so large? Why not start small?
3. michaelwshannon | 03.26.09
why not forgive taxes on 401ks allow people to pull them to buy or save their homes. no new debt and if homes are paid would that not free up moneys for the economy.
4. Shirl Abrahamson | 03.26.09
Are you discouraged by the same old same old from the GOP? I am an American that is very proud of my President. In my 52 years on this earth I have never seen a President have to step into a mess as bad as the one you have to tackle. My prayers are with you.
5. Missy | 03.26.09
Please -
small business and private industry can take care of themselves if government will just stay out of their pockets.
Why -
is Geithner still in office, he committed a gross income tax offense. How can we possibly believe in your administration with this kind of leadership.$34,000 in unpaid back taxes come on….
6. Anne Easterling | 03.26.09
I’ll give them props for trying this format at the presidential level. But being moderated by someone in the administration means that it’s a PR event, not a news event. I’m more interested in seeing how the public reacts.
7. The Sailor | 03.26.09
>”Your budget proposal is larger than all of the budgets combined from George Washington to George W Bush.
No, it’s not. Bush never included the costs of the wars in his budgets. That would be another 3 trillion dollars.
Next time do some research instead of just parroting right wing talking pints.
8. Dale DeWitt | 03.26.09
I navigated to whitehouse.gov and found now formal listing for the subject “drugs.” This means only one thing to me. Government today is sidestepping the hard issue of eliminating prohibition now. Delay indicates obvious corruption in ethical thinking.
9. Jim Boyce | 03.26.09
I read that 65 billion dollars goes to Mexico for drugs. Let’s face it this is a druggy nation, why not legalize it, sell it at a government controlled business and keep that money for ourselves?
How come no one mentions all the drugs, illegal immigrants and other stuff that is pouring in from Canada?
Why doesn’t Congress become a part of the solution instead of being the problem, why not work for free, no salary until this situation is under control, in short serve your country instead of bleeding it dry.
10. Will | 03.26.09
For anyone who’s complaining… Do you realize that Bush was the most secretive and unacessible president this country has every known? Within the next few weeks, President Obama will have given more interviews and open dialog than Bush did in 8 years. Now this is democracy. Thank You President Obama for creating a higher standard!
11. Rich | 03.26.09
Your budget proposal is larger than all of the budgets combined from George Washington to George W Bush.
No, it’s not. Bush never included the costs of the wars in his budgets. That would be another 3 trillion dollars.
Next time do some research instead of just parroting right wing talking pints.
Sailor, that is 9.6 billion dollars/week for the 6 years in Iraq; I don’t think so
12. L. Young | 03.26.09
I’m sure Obama will be more open and fair than Bush. I’m very impressed with the Obama administration and their efforts to take on hard issues at the go-get. They’ve come out of the gate running and running hard. You have to give them credit for that. I’m sure they may stumble some but I’m also sure they will get up and keep running. That seems to be Obama’s nature. I’m confident too that they will address the budget deficit in due time, if the American people will just be patient. I think we have a real winner here for a change. I for one am very impressed.
13. Steve | 03.26.09
Anyone else think it’s kind of funny people are asking the President questions on this forum? Get a clue, or at least read the whole article!
That said, I think this is a great idea. I have no idea whether it will work or not, but at least this administration is trying it out. The last 8 years we have seen our government mostly ignore the population and control/spin everything that they could their way. I am sure that some of you out there will disagree with me on that, but it’s true.
15. Underwood | 03.26.09
If I were to speak to the president, I would say something like this:
President Obama, thank you for this opportunity to speak directly to you. Here is my question. Why do so many of the same people continue to focus on Mr. Geithner’s tax issues when they ignored the tax problems for Governor Sarah Palin? Is it possible that these people are setting a double standard?
16. pete | 03.26.09
rich, actually those numbers are not far off..look at article in washington post for march 9, 2008….
17. David | 03.26.09
The Economic Recovery Act of 2009 isn’t included in Obama’s budget; neither are any of the newly proposed bail-outs, TARP or emergency funding bills. However, if you look at the CBO historical data and their analysis of the Presidents budget(http://www.cbo.gov/) you can see what the government has really been collecting and spending since 1969- on budget and off-budget. Obama’s pledge to reduce the deficit by half by 2012 actually means this: We’ll only spend $658B more than we actually collect in 2012- which is less than half of the $1.8T shortfall in 2009. His budget proposal of $3.6T for 2010 is still $800B more than anything Bush ever spent including the war; the largest single year defit was $458B in 2008. The CBO estimates under Obama’s budget that the deficit will increase by $4.85T in 4 years- 2009 to 2012. Under Bush, in 8 years, it increased by $2.5T. These are the numbers. Everyone in America can look at them and make their own decisions if they care to do so.
18. Cheryl | 03.26.09
Good afternoon Mr. President - I would like to know what do you think about this article in USA Today about our soldiers with medical conditions who are being forced to deploy. Below is the link
http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/2009-03-22-deployment_N.htm?csp=34
19. NightFire | 03.27.09
This is just another sales job by the Obama Administration, one more claim to be open and transparent while being nothing of the sort. The questions were selected by Obama supporters, then by the White House. Obama had plenty of time to rehearse his answers. Slam dunk.
20. A True American | 03.27.09
Will Obama be fair? He hasn’t so far! Fair to me would be: Appoint people to run my government that are not Chicago Crooks for a start! CAN YOU DO THAT? OBAMA
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
Leave a Comment
We do not publish all comments, and we do not publish comments immediately. The comments feature is a forum to discuss the ideas in our stories. Constructive debate - even pointed disagreement - is welcome, but personal attacks on other commenters are not, and will not be published.
Tip: Do not write a novel. Keep it short. We will not publish lengthy comments. Come up with your own statements. This is not a place to cut and paste an email you received. If we recognize it as such, we won't post it.
Please do not post any comments that are commercial in nature or that violate copyrights.
Finally, we will not publish any comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence.
Jimmy Orr has worked in politics for the majority of his professional career working for two U.S. Senators, two Governors and one President. Most recently, Orr served as White House Spokesman and Internet Director for President George W. Bush and Special Advisor to Governor Schwarzenegger for Internet Communications.
David Cook is Washington bureau chief of The Christian Science Monitor and host of the Monitor's newsmaker breakfasts. He was the Monitor's editor from 1994 to 2001. Cook is a graduate of Principia College, served in the U.S. Army, was a Bagehot Fellow at Columbia University, and is a member of the Gridiron Club, Washington's oldest journalistic organization.
1. Ken Wagner | 03.26.09
Do you believe that we should convert to a new world order currency and move away fron the almightly US Dollar?