My thoughts or comments; a lot of negative remarks by Paddick, very wordy answers that limit the number of questions, a lot of ambitious plans that are hard to see costed perhaps (trams for example). The problem, where are those who asked the questions, did any Londoners watch. For all we know the audience could be mostly outside London or even the UK. But an interesting innovation that will remain a point of reference for anyone who wishes to elaborate on some of the proposals a candidate, in this case Paddick makes. Could this be the future of debates? Could it sideline Question Time? Does Paddick do a good job in answering questions? Does he do a good job in managing his image and public perceptions of him? What perceptions can you build from this?
Saturday, April 19, 2008
The first live, full vision interaction with a candidate
My thoughts or comments; a lot of negative remarks by Paddick, very wordy answers that limit the number of questions, a lot of ambitious plans that are hard to see costed perhaps (trams for example). The problem, where are those who asked the questions, did any Londoners watch. For all we know the audience could be mostly outside London or even the UK. But an interesting innovation that will remain a point of reference for anyone who wishes to elaborate on some of the proposals a candidate, in this case Paddick makes. Could this be the future of debates? Could it sideline Question Time? Does Paddick do a good job in answering questions? Does he do a good job in managing his image and public perceptions of him? What perceptions can you build from this?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Isn't the problem in interaction.
The main point is whether people decided to seek it out. And with Question Time you get several different view points plus they do occasionally have added celebrity appeal if someone like a famous writer or journalist is on (eg: Wil Self or Richard Littlejohn (spit) )
And as you make the point whose accountablity in the questions does he answer to.
Good idea and they seem to be using American tactics, but the name Barack Obama is always going have more interest than Brian Paddick.
I watched the debate as someon interested in what he had to say, i was really disapointed. The first five minutes was how great he is and then he rambled on and on I thought he just wanted to answer as few questions as possible. He had a real chance at getting across to voters but blew it. Everythig he said was available somewhere else except, as you say, how he pays for the big ideas. It was like one of those talking head plays but uninteresting
i thoguht he was ok, and he's hot.
god hes awful, never seen him speak before, he looks like a puppet and his mouth moves really odd, all a bit blah blah blah whatever. Mind you hes the best of them, hes not squeeky ken or bumbling boris, but he is too boring to have a nickname
Post a Comment