LAKEWOOD OBSERVER ANNOUNCES MAYORAL VIRTUAL DEBATE

[Jeff Endress]

The Advisory Board of the Lakewood Observer is pleased to announce the 2007 Mayoral Virtual Debate. Watch for the new "Virtual Debate" section on the Observation Deck.

Rules and general guidelines for the Lakewood Observer 2007 online mayoral debates:

The format of this online discussion and debate will generally be as follows:

All Mayoral Candidates are invited and encouraged to participate.
This will be a transparent forum, with no censorship of any posts.
For the purposes of the discussion, the edit feature will not be available. Whatever is posted will remain in the form in which it was posted.
Members of the public are invited and encouraged to comment and ask questions as the digital debate evolves, however, only the candidates themselves will be able to post and respond in the debate section of the Observation Deck. The general public will be able to discuss the information posted by the candidates as they would for any other matter of interest, i.e., by starting or adding to a thread dealing with any specific question. We wish to assure that the debate section reflects only the actual information and positions set forth by the candidates themselves.
From the date when the discussion goes “liveâ€Â￾, the debate forum will remain open for a period of 99 hours, after which it remain accessible, but will no longer accept further posts.

Specific timelines, instruction and information:

On August 27, 2007, each campaign shall be invited to furnish, either through its candidate or designated spokesperson, a list of the Three Most Important Issues Facing Lakewood. These designated issues will frame the debate. The Candidates shall post their designated issues not later than Friday, August 31 at noon, by posting them to the “Onlineâ€Â￾ debate section on the Lakewood Observer Observation Deck. None of the designated issues will be visible to any other candidate, nor the general public, until 12 noon, August 31st at which time all candidates’ posting will go “liveâ€Â￾, to be listed in the order in which they were received.

Thereafter, a panel, made up of Thomas Mulready of Cool Cleveland, Michael Gill of The FreeTimes, & Pete Kotz of The Scene, will each pose three questions relating to the three issues as designated by each campaign. (a total of 9 questions) Those questions will be posted simultaneously by 9/4/07. Candidates will then have until 9/9 at 9:09 am, to post answers and discussion to the questions raised. No responses will be visible until the debate goes “liveâ€Â￾ at 9:09 a.m., at which time all submissions will appear simultaneously. Thereafter, for the next 99 hours, the candidates are encouraged to amplify and defend the position which they have taken in their initial responses to the questions, and the general public will be able to discuss the information submitted by the candidates in separate, non-debate, threads.

The online discussion will be complemented by the print edition of the Lakewood Observer. The 9/18 edition will have a section dedicated to the online debate and public forum. Each candidate will be given 1000 words (approximately one full page) in which to summarize their impression of the online discussion, amplify their position and make their case to the public. The 1000 word limit will be strictly enforced. The remarks of each candidate WILL NOT BE EDITED, CORRECTED OR IN ANY WAY MODIFIED FROM THE FORM IN WHICH THEY ARE SUBMITTED, HOWEVER, ANYTHING BEYOND THE 1000 WORD LIMIT WILL NOT BE PRINTED. It is expected that the 9/18 edition will also contain opinion and articles submitted by Observer writers reflecting on the debate experience.

There will follow, at a date to be determined, before the primary election, a round table discussion with all mayoral candidates, hosted by the Lakewood Public Library Director, Kenneth Warren. This will not be a debate, but rather a panel discussion of the future of Lakewood , and how each candidate views the challenges, problems, assets and attributes of the city. It will be taped for broadcast on Cox Cable community access and also be posted for webcast.

Following the Primary Election, it is anticipated that there will be a repeat of the online debate, in asimilar format, to include the Mayoral finalists as well as council race contestants. The specifics for this second phase will be announced before the primary election.

Jeff Endress

[Donald Farris]

Hi,
So, does this mean the LO is not planning on hosting any real in person debates?

The Advisory Board is missing a great opportunity to expand the Community's awareness of the Lakewood Observer Project.

Why how will we know the comments from the candidates are their own? I once saw a debate where one guy had an ear piece and a box on his back and someone (smarter than the candidate) fed the candidate all the "correct" answers.

[Jim O'Bryan]

Hi,
So, does this mean the LO is not planning on hosting any real in person debates?

The Advisory Board is missing a great opportunity to expand the Community's awareness of the Lakewood Observer Project.

Why how will we know the comments from the candidates are their own? I once saw a debate where one guy had an ear piece and a box on his back and someone (smarter than the candidate) fed the candidate all the "correct" answers.

Don

We had never intended on hosting any face to face debate. From day one if you go back and look at our post all we care about is getting FACTS, IDEAS, and VISIONS out to the voters and residents. This is what the Lakewood Observer has been about since day one, and remains that way still.

Part of our program is a face to face discussion about Lakewood's Future. I would hope Lakewoodites would find this more entertaining than attacts over who cut the summer workers budgets for the parks. Who wrote the curfew law? No, who had to rewrite the curfew law. etc.

I would think you would be the last person to worry about where ideas come from. Are you now saying Savannah's plan should be scraped because it was not thought up by a candidate? It seems like that is what you are saying.

I could have sworn that at one time you mentioned to me that council had no vision, that you were frustrated because they were not open to new ideas, or pushing the envelope. Has that changed? Now we are looking for the ONE person that can run the city without ANY input or help?

The members of the "virtual debate" committee(not the entire advisory board) wanted FACTS, IDEAS and VISIONS, not one liners and vicious attacks. How the hell does that serve Lakewood at this point and time? It was the VDC's opinion we have to cut through the BS, and take politics out of the debates and put the future of Lakewood front and center.

The country's leading civic source journalism project, in print and online can offer far more than one slick 60 minute debate, or 5. The city deserves more, the voters deserve more, and the candidates deserve more.

It is time to come together to move the city forward through leadership(that is leading others).

In this format we have swapped out one liners with applause by a couple thousand partisans, for getting their exact words and thoughts to EVERY VOTER in Lakewood. We are saving MONEY and time, for everyone. We have swapped out monkey shines for the fruit from the tree. EVERYONE has thought it was more than fair, it just lacks the theatrics.

The Candidates choose the topics, and most of the questions. This is unfair how?




.

[Lynn Farris]

Once again a clever idea Jim. This is very untraditional - but interesting.

This format is really more of a team debate if I understand it. It would pit The Mayor's team against Councilman Fitzgerald's and Councilman Demro's.

So we wouldn't necessarily be hearing from the candidate themselves - but from their teams. Of course we don't care whose idea it is as long as it is a good idea. The only stipulation would have to be that the candidate themselves actually endorses the idea and is willing to try to implement it.

I often thought since you won't run for Mayor that someone should take your ideas and incorporate them into their platform.

It wouldn't show the intellect of the individual who is actually running which is important as well - but maybe if the team is intelligent the individual is secondary. The only question would be is if these teams will be around when decisions need to be made in a hurry and the only person available to make them is the Mayor.

[Kenneth Warren]

Don and Lynn:

Speaking personally, I don’t know who I will vote for right now, but I don’t find the adversarial spectacle of the traditional debate likely to produce anything to compel me one way or the other.

I want something better, more substantive, more revelatory, or nothing.
But that’s just me.

So it is rather ironic that Lynn’s very comments about Lakewood lacking the community capacity to pull off a Mayoral debate prompted my interest in exploring whether or not a virtual order of innovation might advance the construction of values important to my sense of community, politics, transparency and the LO project.

You know: “The mission of the Lakewood Observer is to attract, articulate, and amplify civic intelligence and community good will in the city of Lakewood and beyond.â€Â￾

The creation of community values is at the heart of the LO project.

I believe the 2007 Mayoral Virtual Debate offers the opportunity for innovation and substance rather than old-school political playbook and spectacle.

I hope the 2007 Mayoral Virtual Debate will permit us to accentuate the following:

The value of civic trust
The value of issues
The value of questions
The value of answers
The value of discourse
The value of facts
The value of team
The value of action

At its best, the LO Project is not about the value of the first punch, the front porch hot button, the push-poll.

From my point of agency in the LO Project, then, the intentional design of the 2007 Mayoral Virtual Debate shifts attention toward the active and critical construction of these values and away from the buzz words, character flaws (we all have them), hot-buttons, half-truths, political intrigues and spin zones.

It’s very clear that every candidate has a campaign manager and cadre of handlers.

Let them feed the candidates, if they must, in the spirit of civic trust and informed team action, the words, the answers, the facts by which the man will stand and be measured in the political order to which we all belong.

Kenneth Warren

[sharon kinsella]

And we'll have it in writing which is always nice.

Gives us a way to make sure that who ever wins, walks the walk.

[Jeff Endress]

Let them feed the candidates, if they must, in the spirit of civic trust and informed team action, the words, the answers, the facts by which the man will stand and be measured in the political order to which we all belong.

I suppose this is a possibility, but should any candidate elect to allow others to submit any response on his behalf, he will take responsibility for what is written, just as if he had written it himself. It isn't designed or intended to be a "team" debate. The posts will be over the candidates' name, be the candidates' position, and, most importantly, the candidates' written commitment to the electorate.

And we'll have it in writing which is always nice.

Gives us a way to make sure that who ever wins, walks the walk.

Exactly.

And, wouldn't it be just a trifle naive to assume that even in a live debate the candidates had not spent hours with staff, refining answers to potential questions, hours with supporters rehearsing opening remarks, hours reviewing with campaign supporters the bullet points of their message? I mean really folks, just because it comes out of GWB's mouth, what are the chances that it wasn't written by a speech writer?

Jeff

[Jim O'Bryan]

Once again a clever idea Jim. This is very untraditional - but interesting.

This format is really more of a team debate if I understand it. It would pit The Mayor's team against Councilman Fitzgerald's and Councilman Demro's.

So we wouldn't necessarily be hearing from the candidate themselves - but from their teams. Of course we don't care whose idea it is as long as it is a good idea. The only stipulation would have to be that the candidate themselves actually endorses the idea and is willing to try to implement it.

I often thought since you won't run for Mayor that someone should take your ideas and incorporate them into their platform.

It wouldn't show the intellect of the individual who is actually running which is important as well - but maybe if the team is intelligent the individual is secondary. The only question would be is if these teams will be around when decisions need to be made in a hurry and the only person available to make them is the Mayor.

Lynn

Please go back and read the post. There are two out of three areas which push forward the idea of the "candidate" standing on their own. A one on one on TV, with Ken Warren, and then all at one table speaking, ala Meet the Press.

This obsession you have for fluff not substance is baffling me. i have been to many debates and watched many more on TV none have made me jump for joy with a revelation.

The reasons I chose not to run are many. The most important was to clear the area for real candidates. as for putting forward "my" ideas, tonight i was at two meetings that both will be announced shortly and hopefully they will drag the city up another notch. Both of them fly directly in the face of what we have been told by those redesigning our city. The Observer with members and staff have been able to make solid differences, and that is far more important that running for mayor, at least to me.

The Advisory Board reads like the who's who of committee people that offer their ideas for FREE to anyone willing to listen and talk about them. For the record only one person running for mayor has ever spoken with me about my ideas, and that is often. Kevin Butler has also made an effort to understand some of the ideas. One problem with the VAL it is nearly impossible to outline in an hour or two, each piece helps other pieces, together they become stronger and lift the city. Many if not most, are not designed to be implemented by the city or government. By their very nature they are for residents to put forward.

All I ever really wanted from my city officials is safe and clean.

FWIW


.

[Lynn Farris]

Jim,

I do agree with Jeff Endress about preparation.

As someone who debated in both HS and College I do understand the preparation required for a debate. That in itself is very worthwhile. You really do have to consider every issue with which you could possibly be presented and strongly consider all sides of that issue. You have to formulate your plan and then test it against all possible attacks, then you have to possibly modify your plan because you find the holes in it. If you don't find the holes in it - your opponent certainly should.

Some feel that we should never criticize that that is too negative - but in a democracy critiques are healthy it helps us get to the best solution. Yes, this is an adversarial process - but it can also be a respectful one. You are critiquing the plan not the person and that is what is so important. Not in rumors, but where the worthy opponent can explain the fallacy of the critique. Or not - because there is a real legitimate problem.

Another part of the debate preparation is working to find the holes or fallacies in your opponents plans and explain how you would do things differently. Perhaps in working through this exercise, you will find things that you like in their plan and readjust your own plan to incorporate some of their ideas and actually throw them off track.

With all due respect Jim, anyone who has debated knows that debates are not "fluff" they are serious intellectual exercises that stretch everyone. It forces people to consider every side of an issue and look for the flaws in their plans so that they are very solid.

I like the idea of a TV interview with Ken Warren. I like the idea of a "Meet the Press" type of interview. I like the idea of a virtual debate.
All of these are good ideas and are good ways to find out more about the candidates which is great. But I like the idea of a real debate too. Debates have stood the test of time and that normally means something. We have studied the debates in History - the Lincoln Douglass debate comes to mind.

We do have many senior citizens that are very interested in the election. They are used to attending forums or debates. While Ken has done an amazing job of making technology available to everyone in Lakewood - many of our seniors still do not feel comfortable with a virtual debate. I do appreciate that you do have lots of coverage in the paper about this.

[Stan Austin]

Friends of the Observer--- It seems that at this point in time that The Lakewood Observer has assumed the position of "official host" of mayoral discussions and debates. A comprehensive and fair set of guidelines has been proposed.
To date, at least two of the three candidates have recognized the city wide legitimacy of this debate forum and have agreed to participate.
For any other organization to now propose a "debate" at this late date would suggest a simple effort to fill that group's meeting schedule without any real service to the larger community that a "debate" would imply.
Seriously folks, there's only so much drama you can get out of a dump truck of hot asphalt. Let's leave it at this one exchange and be done with it.
Stan Austin

[dl meckes]

We do have many senior citizens that are very interested in the election. They are used to attending forums or debates. While Ken has done an amazing job of making technology available to everyone in Lakewood - many of our seniors still do not feel comfortable with a virtual debate. I do appreciate that you do have lots of coverage in the paper about this.

The Lakewood Observer is going to print 1,000 word responses from each candidate in the paper, which is easily accessible to those who are technology challenged. Or at least that's what has been explained to me.

A lot of seniors don't have cable, either, so the paper is a great way to reach voters.

[Kenneth Warren]

Stan:

It would be constructive of civic trust, I believe, for any candidates who are consenting to the LO Virtual Debate, to state that fact on the LO Deck.

Kenneth Warren

[Lynn Farris]

DL,

I did see that Jim posted this and I completely agree. The paper is the best way for many people to get this information.

[Jim O'Bryan]

Now there are three.

We have jusat recieved confirmation that all three candidates for mayor will take part in the Lakewood Observer Virtual Debate.

I would like to thank all three candidates for trusting this new process.


.