Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I'm creating this thread for information purposes. If it spurs conversation, all the better.

I'd heard about this site before, but until yesterday I had never bothered to check it out. It's probably a good idea to have a highspeed connection for maximum effect. The basic premise is a pair of bloggers (almost all Democrats or DINOs) have an hour long rambling webcam conversation. That sounds boring, but it's a lot more interesting than you'd think. There are some really well-informed and clever (if not perfectly well-spoken) people involved. If you like watching panel discussions on cable news you'll love this, because there are no commercials and no host-set agendas, just pure off-the-cuff politics.

So far I've watched the latest (at the time of this posting) conversations between Robert Wright and Mickey Kaus (which was the reason I came to the site and which was great, really funny, I'd rate it a must-see) and between Matthew Yglesias and Ed Kilgore which was more of a pure Dem political discussion but really interesting anyway.

Next up, Eric Umansky and Steven Cook.

If anyone bothers to check this out in between flame attacks on their idealogical enemies, tell me what you think.

Bloggingheads

"And, representing the Slightly Silly Party, Mr. Kevin Phillips Bong."

* * *

"Er..no. Harper was elected because the people were sick of the other guys and wanted a change. Don't confuse electoral success (which came be attributed to a wide variety of factors) with broad support. That's the surest way to wind up on the sidelines." - Black Dog

Posted
That sounds boring....
And it is.

I watched one a while ago and it was silly. Cinema imitated theatre at first. TV imitated radio at first. I guess the Internet would imitate talking-head TV at first too.

The Internet is its own medium and its strength is that anyone can participate.

Posted

Dear BHS,

I found this one

between Matthew Yglesias and Ed Kilgore which was more of a pure Dem political discussion but really interesting anyway
quite interesting, (apart from Yglesias' stuttering) but not much different from this forum, except perhaps a more 'concentrated' version. Something similar might be tried here, (I believe I suggested it a long time ago) of 'head to head' debates on a particular issue. The 'Friday Night Fights', as it were. Don't know if there would be enough bandwidth to support such a thing.

Would the Special Olympics Committee disqualify kids born with flippers from the swimming events?

Posted

It's not so much the stuttering that I found irritating, as the compulsive throat clearing and pen clicking. But it was still a good discussion.

The really good conversations so far have been Robert Wright and Mickey Kaus, who are both characters with a really subtle, understated sense of humour and who have good chemistry. They poke at each other without really being offensive, and they have a very deep and broad knowledge of the American political scene so that they can make specific references to other pundits and events in a completely informed but off the cuff way. I find it very entertaining, despite what August says.

"And, representing the Slightly Silly Party, Mr. Kevin Phillips Bong."

* * *

"Er..no. Harper was elected because the people were sick of the other guys and wanted a change. Don't confuse electoral success (which came be attributed to a wide variety of factors) with broad support. That's the surest way to wind up on the sidelines." - Black Dog

Posted
They poke at each other without really being offensive, and they have a very deep and broad knowledge of the American political scene so that they can make specific references to other pundits and events in a completely informed but off the cuff way.
If it worked well, the best it could aim for is talking-head TV. And given the low bandwidth and lack of producers, lousy TV at that.

The Internet is fun because anyone can dive in, contribute to the debate and then the discussion will go off in a direction of its own. With TV, you can only throw something at the cat.

In addition, the written word communicates much faster than the spoken word.

Something similar might be tried here, (I believe I suggested it a long time ago) of 'head to head' debates on a particular issue. The 'Friday Night Fights', as it were.
I recall you suggested that before. I don't know if it would work. Some debates take place best over time. In the future, forums might be more restrictive in who they allow to post. Dunno. This medium is still in its infancy.
Posted

August:

I take it your not a fan of podcasting.

Also: what's quicker, reading the book or watching the movie? More accurate to this scenario, which is quicker, reading the report or watching the documentary? Which more accurately conveys the emotional state of the participants? What's funnier, seeing Jerry Seinfeld in person or reading a verbatim transcript of his routine?

The Internet is fun because anyone can dive in, contribute to the debate and then the discussion will go off in a direction of its own. With TV, you can only throw something at the cat.

I think you're unfairly reducing the internet to discussion forums, when in fact it's a great deal more than that, the bulk of which is "throwing something at the cat".

"And, representing the Slightly Silly Party, Mr. Kevin Phillips Bong."

* * *

"Er..no. Harper was elected because the people were sick of the other guys and wanted a change. Don't confuse electoral success (which came be attributed to a wide variety of factors) with broad support. That's the surest way to wind up on the sidelines." - Black Dog

Posted

Dear August1991,

With TV, you can only throw something at the cat.
Perhaps that is why I gave up on television, I think the vast majority of it is garbage, and I love my cat. And 3 dogs.

BHS,

I agree with you on the merits of what you linked to, some of the 'plotical punditry' is top-notch. However, I think that August1991 is lamenting the fact that TV is a 'one-way mental orifice', but the internet can have an unlimited number of people 'screwing your mind', and you, theirs.

Would the Special Olympics Committee disqualify kids born with flippers from the swimming events?

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,908
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    miawilliams3232
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Benz earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Videospirit earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Barquentine earned a badge
      Posting Machine
    • stindles earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • stindles earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...