Presentation for the International Freenet Conference Aug. 19, 1993 "The National Capital FreeNet On-line All Candidates' Meeting" Richard P. Taylor, aa333@FreeNet.Carleton.Ca THE IDEA Freenets are meant to be both a storehouse of information and a means for exchanging ideas. During an election, political parties and candidates are eager to get information to the voters, and voters would like the politicians to listen to their questions, concerns and ideas. It seems clear that Freenets have a significant role to play in this process. One traditional way of meeting the needs of both candidates and voters during an election campaign is to hold all candidates' meetings. The typical format allows each candidate (in a riding, or the party leaders in a national debate) a short time to speak, and/or respond to questions from voters. After each candidate has spoken, they sometimes get a chance to reply to each others' responses. This is a useful and valuable way for voters to get to know the candidates and compare their positions. But some of the problems with this format are: - if there are a lot of candidates, either some won't be allowed to speak, or all will have too short a time to cover the issue - meetings are often disrupted by hecklers and demonstrators who try to make their point of view overwhelm all others - voters wishing to ask questions have to wait in line and there often isn't time for all of them - some voters are too uncomfortable about standing up in front of a crowd, so their voices are never heard - appearances and mannerisms sometimes count more than the content of what is said - candidates are expected to have a quick reply for every question and a quick response to each other in a debate - there is no time for careful thought We would like to model the FreeNet All Candidates' Meeting on the format of the live meetings, but try to remedy some of these problems. The opening statements by the candidates will be modelled by a separate menu area for each candidate where they may post as much or as little information as they choose. Candidates should remember that voters CHOOSE whether or not to read the postings, and should make them as readable as possible. The question and answer session or debate will be modelled by a standard FreeNet newsgroup. FreeNet users will be able to post their questions or comments on election issues and candidates will be able to respond to voters and to other candidates. All postings will be visible to the FreeNet public. The advantages of this service over a live debate are: - everyone can have the opportunity to ask questions without fear of speaking in public - no one gets interrupted (although heckling is still possible via a follow-up posting) - questions and answers can be more carefully composed - the content of questions and answers can be seen completely and can be re-read for better understanding - the appearance and manner of presentation is less likely to prejudice the evaluation of the ideas. This format has its problems. too: - the on-line format is unfamiliar to many - long postings don't get read - there are still ways of heckling (flaming) - it is slow and time consuming - candidates don't know how many people are reading their postings THE PROTOTYPE A prototype menu structure has been built in the "Administration Test Area" of the National Capital FreeNet. There are areas for each of the Federal Political Parties, and for the candidates in each of the area ridings. Volunteers have generated information files and maps for each riding. A newsgroup has been activated but so far has only been used for organizational discussion. THE RESPONSE FROM CANDIDATES ...has been poor. Letters have been sent to all the major political parties to be forwarded to all local candidates. Volunteers have contacted many candidates directly. The political parties have been called numerous times and asked to provide information for posting. There has been publicity in the Ottawa Citizen and in the Hill Times. A few campaign workers have sent information about their candidates and have gotten the candidates to register, but so far, no candidate has posted a message in the prototype area, nor has responded to my e-mail messages. WHY? The PC leadership campaign occupied everyone's attention. The phone lines have been VERY busy almost all the time. Many people get discouraged and stop trying. Modems are difficult to get working. Some volunteers have reported this problem in getting candidates connected. Worries about the permanence of the medium. I don't quite understand this, but staff from both the PC and the Liberal headquarters have expressed this worry. They seem to fear that candidates' postings are more likely to be quoted and used against them than things they say verbally. Too much work. Some candidates have said they are interested but they don't have anyone to do the work of posting information and making sure messages get answered. Not interested. Some people just aren't interested in anything to do with computers. Not a large enough group of voters. Although FreeNet membership is growing rapidly, it is still a small percentage of the voters in this area, and a small percentage of voters in any given riding. Our membership is not evenly spread through the region, but we don't have good statistics on a riding-by-riding basis. There is a risk of being overwhelmed with too many messages. Not answering messages would make a candidate look bad. There is a risk of putting out a lot of effort and not getting across to a significant number of voters in the candidates' own riding. OTHER EXPERIENCES During the American Presidential election, some candidates, especially Bill Clinton, went "on-line" with voters via various computer networks. Clinton has kept an e-mail address for correspondence now he is in office. I believe the format of these sessions was "Meet the Candidate" rather than a debate between candidates. A number of Ottawa-Carleton Regional Councillors have joined the National Capital FreeNet, and some have set up their own menu structures and newsgroup areas to let their constituents know what is going on within RMOC and to collect feedback from the public. It should be much easier to conduct election debates for the municipal elections next year since more of the candidates will already be registered and familiar users. As part of the organizing process for the NCF All Candidates' Meeting, the volunteers held an on-line meeting. Over the course of a couple of weeks, we used the newsgroup to post comments on the various agenda items. The meeting was only partially successful. A number of interesting ideas were suggested, but not all were followed up. I don't think participants felt that they were part of a group - there was little back-and-forth discussion. I think that for a discussion to become interesting and active, people have to see prompt feedback on their messages. THE FUTURE I don't think we will get anything close to full participation by the candidates in this upcoming federal election. I will be satisfied if some candidates do post information and participate in an on-line debate. We need an example to show people how it can work. I believe that any candidate who does participate and gets elected is very likely to remain connected and will probably use the FreeNet to communicate with constituents. This seed will grow, and the NEXT federal election will almost certainly involve much more active on-line debates. The changes will take place slowly, but I think that FreeNets have the potential to radically change the political process. Over the last decade or so, the way politicians communicate with voters has been strongly influenced by the medium of television. Election campaigning and the conduct of the House of Commons are now oriented to the 30 second newsclip. The public is not given much opportunity to question or comment on the politicians' behaviour, but the news reporters' questions are given a lot of weight. I think FreeNets will change this in a different direction. There will be more opportunity for people to ask their questions and state their views, and the politicians will have to publicly reply. Their words won't have to be filtered by reporters and editors, but the politicians will have to compose their statements more carefully (for example, remember the transcripts of some of George Bush's statements quoted in the Doonesbury comic strip last year). I'd like to end with a personal statement. Computer networks of all kinds are going to change our lives, our organizations and our country. It bothers me that most of the current crop of politicians seem to be technically illiterate or technophobic. The changes that technology brings also bring problems to be solved. Those problems are not going to be solved by politicians with their heads in the sand. In this election, I plan to vote for the candidate and the political party which make the best use of the FreeNet to communicate with the public.