Liveblogging the leaders’ debate

Take your pick, everyone’s doing it:

The debate itself is an unintelligible shouting match, so I don’t think there’s much analysis to get out of it.

But feel free to analyze the liveblogs themselves below. Which is funniest? Most astute? Quickest?

UPDATE: My initial reactions: most of these liveblogs sound more like transcripts. Are these for people who can’t access TV? They seem to think that knee-jerk snark can replace rapid analysis. As the king of knee-jerk snark, I wonder why I’m not being paid to liveblog this.

My winner is the National Post, which has special software which works properly, has comments from a team of writers instead of one personality, and includes (moderated) comments from visitors with the liveblog comments. Losers include Le Devoir and Canoe, which didn’t have liveblogging at all.

UPDATE 2: Paul Wells has a franco blogger roundup of debate analysis.

UPDATE 3: Regan Ray at J-Source has a taste of the liveblogging action.

2 thoughts on “Liveblogging the leaders’ debate

  1. dan

    the national post one seems a bit too pro-harper for me. it’s one thing to say that his performance was strongest, but to consistently pat him on the back and decry the other leaders’ statements as outrageous is a bit too much for me to take it seriously.

    and i can’t for the life of me understand why so many of these bloggers thought the “say something nice to the guy on your left” question was so great. it was ridiculous! what a stupid exercise and a waste of time.

    Reply
  2. Fagstein Post author

    The Post has a conservative slant, and I don’t think anyone’s trying to hide it. Truth sometimes comes out only in snark form.

    The Post bloggers also made fun of the “say something nice” question. I don’t think it tells us much about their policies (then again, neither does the shouting match of the rest of the debate), but it’s useful to remind ourselves that these people treat each other as humans and give each other respect, despite their differences. It gives us some insight into their character.

    And, most importantly, it caught them off-guard (though it really shouldn’t have – I’ve seen the question used before).

    Reply

Leave a Reply