There has been some talk in the blogsphere of live blogging by elected officials. The comparisons to podcasts, videocasts and radio have been raised. The question is: do live blogs serve a purpose? I believe the answer is a resounding yes.
Live blogs are not perfect, but then neither are any of the mediums. Live blogs allow the elected official to dodge questions, and to provide politically correct answers (written by their staffs?) to questions. OK, but the same can be said for podcasts and videocasts. With the exception of the latest radio shows, live blogs still provide the best way for anyone with a computer to interact with their elected officials. And that is a good thing.
Live blogs lay bare the dodging of questions by the electeds. Don’t think for one minute that those who are participating are not aware of this. As a matter of fact, one of the things that you will hear about live blogging is that the elected “answered some tough questions.”
Even though I missed both of yesterday’s live blogs (due to work), in each case we were presented with an opportunity to pose our questions in advance and to have those questions read, if not answered, by the elected. And I can go back and read the questions and answers at my leisure. That works for me. I don’t always have 30 minutes to listen to a podcast or an hour to listen to a radio program. (I have to admit that I enjoy doing podcasts but I don’t enjoy listening to them.) It’s different strokes for different folks.
Live blogs serve a purpose. Keep ’em coming 🙂
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
I am a big critic of “live blogs”. Sitting around and hitting “refresh” on my computer is not my idea of time well spent.
But you do bring up a good point. Employing “blogger ethics” principles, you do end up with communications with electeds and their responses, “in writing”.
In that light, it may “keep ’em honest” so to speak.
I like live blogs. Unless I’m very interested in it I don’t sit around hitting refresh. I just wait till it’s and then go read. It takes a whole lot less time to scan a live blog for information than to listen through a whole podcast.
I also really like the new blog radio idea. I think that has a lot of potential.
I think that no matter what the format, politicians will always dodge some tough questions.
that should say…wait till it’s OVER…
On dodge questions my questions seem to always be dodged
Most recently by the AG and Delegate Ebbin
I guess thats a compliment that they are good haha
They aren’t really live blogs. You post questions the day before or so and then they are all answered “live”
echo Whackettes comments
I noticed your question being mindfully “missed” by the AG novamiddleman.
I don’t hit refresh either unless I have a question pending. Then its usually to see where the elected is in the list of things.
I am not a fan of them, and I must say I don’t really know what “blog radio” is.
But to echo what Scott, Vivian and others say. At least blogs are being recognized as a viable media outlet and not discounted as a bunch of computer geeks trying to be Doogie Howser, MD.
Vivian- On the specific topic of Scott’s question, I have addressed it directly over on his blog. I will repost my answer here. I hope this helps with this specific inquiry.
On the general issue of “live blogs”… any live blog done by the Attorney General is truly done “live”. He does not answer questions early, and he only answers questions during the hour of the event. We treat it like a one-hour long press conference. That is the manner in which we will continue to approach these events, and we look forward to becoming even more active in the blogosphere in the months and years ahead. Keep up the great work!
Answer just posted to Scott’s blog:
Scott- I have noted your post here, and though I have not yet seen any emails to this office from you on the subject, I have decided to respond on your blog so that we can better explain this issue, and the Attorney General’s position on it.
First, in regards to wondering why your question was not taken, we apologize for that. This is an issue we have devoted tremendous time to, so in no way would we ever attempt to evade a question about it. During a live blog we attempt to answer as many questions as possible, however, due to time, we cannot answer all of them. So, again, I apologize that yours was not one of the ones answered last evening.
As far as the proposal to require the registration of email addresses, we absolutely agree that this is not a “silver bullet.” However, we do believe it is an important step that is worth taking, and I’d like to spell out why.
First, we now have the manpower in place to make such a plan feasible. As part of Bob McDonnell’s overhaul of the state Sex Offender Registry last year, 45 state troopers have been hired, and they are tasked solely with confirming that registered information is correct. The addition of email address confirmation will just fall under their already established duties, and represent a small addition of work. Now when they check physical addresses, they will also be able to check computers by running diagnostic tests to determine the email addresses used on that computer.
Second, we believe that this proposal will create a significant new deterrent to those thinking of committing another crime.
For one, by adding email addresses to the list of mandatory information to be registered, we are putting it on the same level as the registration as a physical address. If a predator lies about the information he submits, he will be facing a new criminal penalty, so there is that deterrent. Just like a predator can move and not tell police, so too could they get a new email address and not tell police. But with the new resources in place they will face criminal penalties if they do this, and we are better prepared now to stop this from occurring.
The General readily notes in every discussion about this issue how easy it is to get a new email address, but this is an important step in adding a new layer of protection to the registry. The same rules that apply to physical addresses will now apply to virtual addresses, with the same penalties for failure to abide, and the same procedures to ensure that predators are providing accurate information.
As this effort moves forward IP addresses are being looked at for inclusion. At this time the technology is still being worked on to make this feasible, but rest assured, just as Virginia was the first jurisdiction in the world to secure a felony conviction for the sending of SPAM, so too will Virginia remain the national leader in online safety.
I hope this helps to address some of your concerns. We know this is not a “silver bullet” we have never advocated it as being such. But, we do believe this is a worthwhile step to take, and therefore we are committed to adding the registration of email addresses to the registry requirements for convicted sex offenders in Virginia.
Tucker Martin
Director of Communications
Office of Attorney General Bob McDonnell
Vivian,
If you and Kirwin didn’t talk so long, the podcast wouldn’t be 30 minutes.
I’m disappointed to see the response here about podcasts. I wish folks would comment over on my blog giving me this feedback about their dislikes of podcasts, but they can’t since no link was provided in this post.
Since folks don’t like or listen to them, I guess we’ll stop doing them.
Tucker Martin says:
*really now*?
OK. Maybe not the last sentence. But, as I have been trying to tell you guys, we have to keep the comments informative and on point. The podcast needs to be done in 10 minute segments. And, they must be entertaining.
And, for some reason, I feel like I have been on the wrong side of every argument. So, Vivian, I LOVE live blogs.
Leave me in peace.
Jim, I think podcasts face a double hurdle. First, a podcast has to find its way to a person who enjoys the format (when I’m looking to better understand the personalities involved in an issue, I prefer a podcast. When I just want information, I prefer the written word). That’s not easy, and the audience is almost always smaller than one would hope, given the amount of effort it requires. The second hurdle is on the podcaster’s end – it really is a lot harder to come off well in audio than it is on a web page. Much harder.
Jim – you’re being overly sensitive again. There aren’t enough comments in here to say one way or another how folks in the aggregate feel about podcasts. Perhaps the folks that love podcasts haven’t found this post yet, because they are at work and only read blogs in the evening. Or perhaps they never will find this post.
Only you know what the numbers are for your podcasts. That is a much better indicator of how well they are received than the four or five people who have commented in this thread.
(I was writing the same time as you guys.) Jim – podcasting with Brian and me is like herding cats 🙂 I agree – they should be only about 10 minutes.
Live Blogging is like walking. Sure it works, but driving is better
I enjoy your podcasts, Jim. I’ve listened to all of them except the ones where you interview Republicans (shudder, shudder), although I did listen to one you had with Delegates Suit and Iaquinto. I like those 2 – they aren’t full of BS like so many other GOPpers. Anyway… I think podcasts are a great media albeit different and probably not as popular as live-blogs, but they do serve a good purpose. Keep ’em coming, Jim.