In “Politics of sexy silliness - YouTube election,” the author reports that YouTube has many videos about teasing politicians, and that this method is not a good way to promote their policies. The most popular video on YouTube is about two presidential candidates in the U.S. YouTube also has many funny videos that are related to famous people, such as the Prime minister of Australia and Paris Hilton. The author also said campaign politicians who use clips with dancing on YouTube might succeed at first, but it does not reflect exactly the policy of politicians. Finally, YouTube users should know what the true information is and choose it to adapt to their lives.
Politicians should not promote their policies on YouTube, because these videos may make watchers confused; politicians should choose other ways to find supporters, and YouTube should have censorship to censor videos if these videos make watchers feel bad.
The first reason that politicians should not use YouTube to promote their campaign is that funny videos might make users confused about the character and policies of the politician. Some videos show funny face and funny actions of politicians, such as their dancing with sexy girls and their singing a funny song. These videos make users confused about what the real characters of politicians are. Watchers also get confused about politicians’ policies because some videos show politicians talking about a policy to help children, but they show only sexy girls, no boys. These videos damage politician’s image. A politician should be a credible person who we choose to be a leader of country, not a clown.
The second reason is that politicians should find other better channels to promote their campaign than using the internet. We have to accept that the internet is an easy way to access people, but it is not the best way. People who are surfing on the internet to see politicians’ funny videos do not want to vote for them, but just want to relax with jokes on YouTube. Politicians should use other ways to show their policies. For example, a politician may talk to people in a public area. People might feel closer to a politician than if he used other ways. In addition, a politician may use other media which are is reliable, such as television and newspaper. These ways are better than using internet.
YouTube should have a department to censor videos if videos are dangerous for some people, or for watchers. For example, YouTube should ask politicians if it has videos about funny politicians, whether these videos are dangerous for their image or not. If politicians tell YouTube that these videos are not harmful to them, YouTube can post these videos to the public. On the other hand, if politicians say that these videos should not be posted on the internet, YouTube should respect their right.
In conclusion, politicians should not use YouTube to promote their policies. The first reason is it may make watchers confused about a politician’s personality and policy, because there are many funny videos that may lead to the misunderstanding of watchers. The second reason is that YouTube is not a good way to promote policy, because a lot of people who watch videos want to see a funny video, not to vote. Finally, YouTube has to ask people who are related to videos before posting videos.
Akerman, P. (2007, July 19). Politics of sexy silliness - YouTube election. The Daily Telegraph (Australia). Retrieved on March 28, 2008, from Lexis-Nexis.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment