My http://www.blogher.com/node/22465 ">fifteen minutes

with Cooper left me buzzing. I wanted to go live in Anderson-world. It’s rare you’re in the presence of someone really imbued with the purpose of their work, but that’s how I felt after our talk. It made me want to work harder. Cooper is someone admits he works “all the time,” but what I emerged with from our brief interview was a sense of the importance of passion and social justice. (Ed note: the funny thing about CNN is that in the midst of its obsession with Paris Hilton and horses that fall off trails, and bland morning anchors, it maintains room for some iconoclasts, like Cooper and Lou Dobbs). And it’s ironic, because my primary experience of watching presidential candidates discourse has been one of numbness, process, talking points. So when Cooper told me the purpose of this new debate format is to “infuse questions with a new spirit and energy,” I believed him. I want to thank BlogHer readers for providing such good questions and helping to create a natural discussion.

I’ve summed up our discussions below, using quotes sparingly because I did not have a recorder and I don’t want to misquote. If I misconstrue, I apologize. In our brief discussions, three themes emerged:

[img_assist|fid=4377|thumb=1|alt=CNN/YouTube|caption=CNN/YouTube Debate logo]The Importance of “Bottom Up” Media

Anderson’s take on the YouTube debate is that it’s an unknown quantity for both the network and the candidates. Unlike most presidential debates or forums, in which a moderator or panel of journalists pose questions to the candidates, on Monday night YouTube is the panel, and voter generated content provides question materials. (To watch some or submit your own, click here). CNN’s Washington Bureau Chief David Bohrman said on air yesterday that there might be some tougher questions that challenge the candidates- implying other debates didn’t? I asked Anderson if that was true.

He said the thing that he thinks will be challenging is that not only are these questions a traditional moderator might not ask, but that the questions twist and turn. “You…think it’s going one way, then it turns around.” He noted candidates will have to listen to the whole stream, and not spout poll-tested talking points (well, at least not the whole time). He said he was struck by the quality of the questions and the diversity of those posing them (although early reports showed very few women submitted questions, he said he noted a strong diversity…I’m not buying it, but ok).

I then asked, is one of the goals of this debate to take candidates out of their comfort zone? Cooper said the major goal- - is to show a different side of candidates, and yes, to take people out of comfort zone. He said he thought the campaigns seemed “nervous…we’re all little nervous.” The debate should infused with “the spirit and energy of questions, the spirit of the voters’ questions should “infuse and inform entire debate.” Thankfully, Anderson admitted he didn’t know what this “infusion” actually meant, but I think I do.

I hope the debate echoes at least part of what we see online everyday, at BlogHer and on other sites: true discussions, questions off-book, questions that are the product of real curiosity.

Feely snarky, I asked Anderson if he wanted a seminal, “Boxers vs. briefs” pull quote to come from the CNN/YouTube debate Monday night.

He bristled and said, no, “it’s more serious than that…it’s a real bottom up process…” CNN is not “cherry picking” the questions they think are most appropriate. They’re going to pool the best ones and see what happens. He hopes it’s more of a “conversation.” And that he will facilitate dialogue by ensuring when a candidate responds, you can redirect the question to another.

I hope this isn’t the end of the feedback loop. If CNN wants to create a real conversation, they need to offer viewers a place to retort. Anderson did mention that many of the campaigns are preparing videos- but I think the YouTube channel devoted to discussion of the debate—CitizenTube—should have a stronger role and a more publicized “retorting” ability for voters.

[img_assist|fid=4377|thumb=1|alt=CNN/YouTube|caption=CNN/YouTube Debate logo]
Responsibility

The best thing about talking to Cooper was his complete sense of responsibility and respect for both his interview subjects and his audience. I asked him my favorite question, which was from our NGO and Social Change editor Britt Bravo:

She asked: how does he beat burn out and compassion fatigue?

He took a minute to think. He said burnout is tougher, because his “tendency is to work all the time, work on weekends and vacation days for 60 minutes, with no time off. Echoing a sentiment many of us feel, he said if he does take a week off, he feels “torn.” Echoing a sentiment very few of us feel, he also added that invariably, if he takes time off “something happens.” Global crises have no respect for beach time, I guess.

Anderson did say that the best way to fight against burnout is to do a variety of different things, and to feel different things. This way, work feels fresh. Also, you need to try to keep a balance, to hang out with your dog and your friends and recharge. Amen.

Cooper stated that if you suffer compassion fatigue, it’s a “copout.” If nothing really affects you, but you’re asking people to let you into their lives, you’re doing them disservice, and you’re doing your audience a disservice.

He noted: “When I was 23 and first started and spent 2 years in war zones…I found that my reactions [were] not what they should have been…” In Rwanda, during the genocide, he could no longer react in a "sensible" way. So, he “took a break from combat stuff for a year…and then started doing it again.” You owe it to those whose stories you tell, and to your audience to feel. Still, I cannot imagine that Katrina did not take a chunk out of his psyche. Or perhaps, it gave him an all new energy.

[img_assist|fid=4377|thumb=1|alt=CNN/YouTube|caption=CNN/YouTube Debate logo]New Journalism

Next, I asked Anderson some of your questions about journalism, YouTube, and fame.

First I asked JoAnn’s question: since he has become famous, are there any types of reports that he finds more difficult to cover than when he was an unknown reporter? If so, how does he handle these differently now than he did in the past?

Anderson laughed and said, he deludes himself that he’s not famous. This helps him interact normally with people, because the celebrity makes him uncomfortable. But he acknowledged, it “cuts both ways- it helps to have people know you” if you’re in a war zone and you need to get on a chopper…you’ll get greater access.
Anderson did stress that being a journalist, for him, is being a blank slate. One must adapt to any situation, because you’re “telling a story…it’s all about the story.” It’s funny, because being a blogger is the opposite: good bloggers are anything but blank slates. They bring it ALL to the page (or screen, as it were).

To that end, I asked Anderson the second half of JoAnn’s question: he has suggested that he sees the future of news leaning towards the YouTube generation- and does he see a tension between old media and new?
He stressed that citizen journalists and professional journalists don’t battle against each other, and that it’s important to tell the story from as many angles as possible.

He said obviously there wasn’t YouTube 17 years ago when he started, but if there were, he would have probably taken that path, creating his own videos on YouTube.

That said, “there is something to be said for research, fact checking, standards of what they put on the air…a lot to be said for that. Getting it right does count.” It’s important to know where information is coming from. And yeah, people write stuff of the web, people believe it…some of it is completely off the wall stuff.

In short, there’s a role for mainstream media, and it’s not a battle for supremacy. I don’t think any but the most obstreperous blogger would disagree with this.

Then I asked him about Paris Hilton. I asked Stacy’s question: Hello. I'm interested in how much control Anderson himself has over what goes into his broadcasts. For example, it was clear he was unhappy covering Paris Hilton, so was that something he felt he had to do to compete with the other networks, or something he was made to do by the suits?

Anderson said he has control over what goes on the air, and that since his job is “to tell stories…you are able to spend time on the one that matter to you.” He was just in Congo, Iraq, Afghanistan. The show covers Iraq (which Anderson noted is the “most important” story now) every night, which some other networks (ed: hello, Fox News) don’t even mention. Anderson said, you have to consider what people want to see, but if you do a show based on what people want to see, "you end up with nothing but true crime stories.”

He noted it’s a privilege to be in peoples’ living rooms...but there are lots of folks he’s competing against, so yeah, when Paris got out of jail and did Larry King... “if there were any two days to cover it, those were them.”
We closed by talking about the role of the Internet and politics in 2008. I asked him the million dollar question that everyone seems to ask: ok fine, we know the web can raise money for candidates, and it drives message, but can it get people to vote?

Anderson said he didn’t know. He said the big question for him is, “are people using it to reach just folks who would have gone to polls anyway”? We agreed no one knows the answer to this.

He continued, “What’s so interesting about time we’re living in is that nobody knows what’s next. He told me about how he makes sure he goes to a tech media conference once a year to keep up to date. Four years ago he went to fancy, Silicon Valley genius conference and no one predicted the impact of online video. We have “no idea what’s coming down the pike. Who knows? Who knows what kind of hand held device will be in people’s living rooms [four years from now]”?

Final question, from the audience: Will he try his hand at writing fiction?

He laughed and said “I don’t think I’m that good a writer to do that…I marvel at writers’ ability to tell stories and weave narratives.” Still, it’s clear Cooper is a storyteller, but a visual one.

Unlike many skeptics online, I’m looking forward to this debate. I think it signals a shift, a maturing of both voter generated content, and acknowledgement that online political participation is simply an extension of the ancient tradition of the forum, the commons, and the town hall meeting. Stay tuned for coverage Monday night. Like Anderson and, I'd wager, Hillary Clinton, I’m a little nervous!

PS: Apologies to Cooper and Emily: I did not get to ask Anderson what social issue he could choose for our 12,000 plus bloggers to "act" on this year in BlogHers Act. Maybe Monday? I would love to know.