Change.gov open for (favorable) questions

The only thing dumber than opening a website for the public to submit and vote on questions to Barack Obama (which will either provide a platform for anti-Obama content or require suppression of it) is to do so in the midst of a scandal that people are trying to link to Obama. And -- sure enough! -- Politico is already covering the way visitors to the site are flagging questions about Blagojevich as inappropriate.

Comments

[Rob]

Brendan tells us it's dumb to open a website on which people can ask not only fawning questions but also questions that are confrontational. For the last eight years that sort of confrontation has been known as speaking truth to power. Now it may "require suppression." Am I the only one who feels a chill?

[bnyhan]

Rob's being disingenuous. I'm obviously not calling for suppression of anti-Obama speech. I'm saying that from a practical political perspective the Obama transition team will have to decide whether to allow embarassing anti-Obama content on their site or to suppress it (either directly or through their supporters flagging all negative questions as inappropriate).

[David]

There are two ways to look at this issue: political advantage or good government. From a good government POV, when there is a scandal could be the best time to open such a website, if the President uses the site to disclose his role, if any, in the scandal. OTOH, the alternative of not having such a site or eliminating embarassing questions may be wise politically.

I find it sad that we citizens find it acceptable for the President to hide embarassing facts, rather than reveal them. In fact, we actually encourage such behavior when we view the decision through the lens of political advantage rather than good government.

P.S. hitting the Edit button works, but the response is very slow.