<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: It Worked! Though Not a Revolution, The YouTube Debate Impressed</title>
	<link>http://www.epolitics.com/2007/07/24/it-worked-though-not-a-revolution-the-youtube-debate-impressed/</link>
	<description>dissecting the craft of online politics and online advocacy</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 03:41:05 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Polina</title>
		<link>http://www.epolitics.com/2007/07/24/it-worked-though-not-a-revolution-the-youtube-debate-impressed/#comment-109445</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jul 2007 19:51:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.epolitics.com/2007/07/24/it-worked-though-not-a-revolution-the-youtube-debate-impressed/#comment-109445</guid>
					<description>I wouldn't say that the electorate was the big winner at the debate. The illusion is definitely there, but CNN did, afterall, filter the videos, and though it all looked unscripted, the candidates were still saying the same silly things: pledging change, etc etc etc. The politicians were unwilling to take real stances, make concrete plans, or be sincere with the audience. All are practiced politicians, all are very good at using euphemisms. The real winners were Google, YouTube and CNN.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wouldn&#8217;t say that the electorate was the big winner at the debate. The illusion is definitely there, but CNN did, afterall, filter the videos, and though it all looked unscripted, the candidates were still saying the same silly things: pledging change, etc etc etc. The politicians were unwilling to take real stances, make concrete plans, or be sincere with the audience. All are practiced politicians, all are very good at using euphemisms. The real winners were Google, YouTube and CNN.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
