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.