Great Italy pictures.
]]>I try not to get carried away with graphics, and rarely link to video, because there are a number of people who stop by who can only connect via dial-up.
It’s even more annoying than people discussing shows on HBO, a network that no one I know subscribes to, even where it is available.
If you exclude people, they aren’t likely to vote.
]]>what they didn’t do well, was advertise the youtube part of it sufficiently beforehand. i only found out about it in time to do something about the technological and financial barriers [had i wanted to] because i surf youtube incessantly [and it wasn’t really obvious there iether]. my parents found out about it when i called them up yesterday and told them i was inviting myself over to their place to commandeer their tv for two hours. you might not expect a couple of old fogeys to know about youtube first-hand, but my parents watch cnn on television almost as much as i surf the internet.
if cnn had been advertising their collaboration with youtube properly, half my family would have been calling me up or sending me e-mails, asking me if i were going to participate.
i’m considering submitting a question for the republican debate. 😈
]]>It occurred to me that this affects people on the YouTube end as well: only people with computers, broadband connections, videocams or digital cameras with a video mode, a YouTube account (that last admittedly free), and the skills to create, edit and post a video could ask questions. That eliminated a lot of poor people and probably not a few senior citizens as well.
Was the YouTube sourcing of questions a bad idea? Well, it was better than having them contrived purely by pundits, but inevitably, “we the people” see only a small percentage of ourselves represented among the questioners due to technological and financial limitations.
]]>