Devoted to online marketing, viral marketing, and web marketing

While the idea of giving ordinary Americans the chance to offer questions to presidential candidates through Internet means like YouTube is a good one, it looks like with anything else, it's simply going to be played and used by those with private agendas to promote their own interests.

An article in the LA Times by Tim Rutten gave a devastating critique of what CNN did in selecting questions from YouTube participants.
 
Using data from a Pew survey, he said the questions selected by CNN staffers didn't come even close to reflecting the major concerns of Americans.

He especially attacked the immigration focus, which while important, isn't near the top of major concerns of Americans, yet had a half-hour of the debate given to it. He added questions like the "right to fly the Confederate flag, Biblical inerrancy, along with the complete failure to filter out Democrat plants as questioners," makes the network at least incompetent and also corrupt in its operations. Extraordinary charges.

It is a shame that questions, especially the immigration one, which seems to be an attempt by CNN to increase the ratings of Lou Dobbs, whom CNN is attempting to raise to compete at a much higher level through the issue. Dobbs has made immigration one of the key issues he talks about on pretty much a daily basis.

The point is that the Internet is a great way to offer participation to those not usually given a chance to express their concerns. To subjectively filter through questions to forward your own agenda, will do more to make the process irrelevant than anything else.

Unfortunately the practices of CNN have made the use of asking questions through the Internet meaningless. We need more integrity and honesty if it's ever going to make a difference.

It's a sad commentary on the lengths CNN will go to shamelessly promote itself through a presidential debate.