The 24-hour news cycle is now a "forum" and spawns "flame wars"

[gulliver]

The 24-hour news cycle is no longer a news cycle when it comes to politics. It is more like an Internet forum with all of the weaknesses of that kind of forum. The President posts something. Then Fox News and dozens of Democrats and Republicans post something. The posts are made one way, like a continuous string of open letters. None of the posts are made face-to-face. And that's the root problem, in my opinion. A good, time-honored solution might be to insist on real-time, two-way dialog. If our politicians have something to say to one another, they should say it face-to-face.

Fear of immediate reprisal is a great encourager of respect. And you don't get that element of fear from what is a effectively a "video posting flame war" via the news (and non-news outlets like Fox News). The problem is that the parties have too much time to react, there is no possibility of a follow-up reaction, and the sporadic timing favors lying as a strategy.

In a speech or press conference, President Obama can send a brutal salvo at Mitch McConnell, for example, but it usually won't hit the news until minutes or hours later. Frequently (if not usually) McConnell's response will be sought and posted simultaneously with Obama's salvo. The result? Obama's great salvo appears in the news as if it were "immediately" deflected by McConnell. And despite the fact that McConnell's "immediate" deflection may be an outright lie, the lie will stand and will even be recorded as the last word.

Now imagine the same Obama salvo being leveled against McConnell in real time with McConnell present and expected to respond. McConnell may or may not be able to think of a response in real time, but he sure as hell better not lie or act like a jerk. With Obama right there in the room, a television audience, and a perpetually available archive of the event available on the Internet, McConnell would lie at his own risk.

Individual misbehavior like McConnell's would be a world harder in a real forum, but another big problem with our de facto "24-hour news video forum" approach is that it equalizes every Republican Joe Blow, every pundit, every Karl Rove, every American Crossroads with Obama. President Obama gets a single "post." Then every single peanut in the peanut gallery gets as many response posts as they want. And no matter how true Obama's post is and no matter how false the others, Obama's message can be quickly inundated in a sea of cynically dishonest propaganda.

This gang-up factor disappears and is completely reversed in a face-to-face, real forum between the Congress and the President. An intelligent, skilled communicator like Obama would have immense persuasive power in such a forum. For example, recall the televised meeting Obama had with the Republican Caucus on health care. Obama easily wiped up the floor with the hapless Republicans. The behavior of all concerned was appropriately respectful. On the other hand, think of George W. Bush in a similar situation. A guy like Bush in a real forum would know what it feels like to be a bug on a griddle. In fact, fear of such forums might just keep guys like Bush out of politics.

I think Obama and his administration could issue a challenge to the Republicans to communicate with him face-to-face or shut up. If they have a criticism about what he is doing or saying, let them say it in a semi-weekly televised dialog where the American people can judge what they are hearing for themselves. Repeated, pre-scheduled dialogs are absolutely essential, in my opinion, for the fear of lying and bad behavior to moderate Congressional Republicans and other attendees. They need to know that what they say in the current meeting can easily be brought up again in the next.

The same thing should be done with the Washington Press Corps. Obama could talk to them directly every few days and engage them in a two-way dialog. I think that without this face-to-face, back-and-forth dialog, we will see nothing but an incoherent flame war where the most inflammatory lies carry the day. The American voter deserves a clean debate.