Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Government United States Politics News

US Senate & House Create YouTube Channels 199

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the can't-wait-for-them-to-do-something-that-matters dept.
eldavojohn writes "Following an election in which online videos played an important role, the United States House of Representatives and United States Senate have opened YouTube channels (or 'hubs') advertised to be a 'backstage pass to your government.' Ideally this will bring transparency to citizens and inform them of their senators' & representatives' positions and ideas."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

US Senate & House Create YouTube Channels

Comments Filter:
  • oh goodie (Score:5, Funny)

    by Zashi (992673) on Wednesday January 14, 2009 @12:22PM (#26451347) Homepage Journal

    This we be watched as much as c-span! ....
    >_

    • Re:oh goodie (Score:5, Interesting)

      by betterunixthanunix (980855) on Wednesday January 14, 2009 @12:24PM (#26451387)
      Which is unfortunate but true. Most people do not care about their government.

      Even more unfortunate is that I cannot download these videos, at least not without violating the TOS, and so I cannot store my own copies of those proceedings.
      • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 14, 2009 @12:29PM (#26451525)

        Here is a nice human interest video from Pelosi:
        http://youtube.com/watch?v=wtOW1CxHvNY [youtube.com]

        • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 14, 2009 @12:35PM (#26451665)

          Here is a nice human interest video from Pelosi: http://youtube.com/watch?v=wtOW1CxHvNY [youtube.com]

          That one's good but even better is this video on equal rights for women from Senator John:
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfLAv3JHRwY [youtube.com]

        • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

          by LordKronos (470910)

          OMG. I wish I had mod points. I thought that was fake (somebody just pretending to be Pelosi), but there it is linked from the House's YouTube channel, so it's legit (unless the account was hacked). Kudos to her for that video.

          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            by cayenne8 (626475)
            I hope they put the cameras just outside the doors of the senate/house of reps.

            Wasn't it a few years ago that some lady senator got into a fight with a guard and started hitting him? I think it caused her not to get re-elected.

            Stuff like that would be fun to have on Youtube...

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Tdawgless (1000974)
        Some people care about parts of our government. CSPAN doesn't get watched because you have to watch all the parts you don't care about just to get to the parts you do care about. At least now, I can search the videos for the stuff I care about. Like legalizing retroactive abortion...
        • Some people care about parts of our government. CSPAN doesn't get watched because you have to watch all the parts you don't care about just to get to the parts you do care about.

          At least now, I can search the videos for the stuff I care about. Like legalizing retroactive abortion...

          Yep. CSPAN gets extremely boring. That's why I'm glad there are sites like CSPAN Junkie [cspanjunkie.org].

        • C-Span has had streaming video on their website for a good long time.

      • Re:oh goodie (Score:4, Informative)

        by alvinrod (889928) on Wednesday January 14, 2009 @12:35PM (#26451671)

        Why let something as silly as a little TOS stop you, when it's so utterly pointless and stupid given the ease of acquiring a copy of the video. No one is going to begrudge you for trying to be a better citizen. Except for the politicians perhaps.

        For those curious about how to download videos from youtube, this site [blogspot.com] will give you an easy method of doing so.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Tubal-Cain (1289912) *
          Or you can copy it from your /tmp/ folder. Or your ~/.mozilla/firefox/randomgibberishhere.default/Cache/ folder.
          Although your link notes that his method yeilds a higher-quality video than coping from cache.
        • by Hatta (162192)

          Because TOS violations are federal crimes [arstechnica.com] now.

        • by orielbean (936271)
          You might want to ask Lori Drew about that TOS you are not concerned about...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lori_Drew
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by liquidpele (663430)
        Oh please!

        Who has time to sit there while not being paid and watch someone else all day doing their job? I sure as hell don't. Not to mention it's boring as all hell about 70% of the time because they'll be going over stuff you don't necessarily care about at every minute of the day.

        A much better way to get people involved, in my opinion, is to have the channels like they have, but then have links during the channels going to the written legislation they are talking about with summaries and notes fro
        • Well, watching that your employees are doing their job is part of a boss' job.

          And those people in Congress and House are essentially your employees, if you're a US citizen. Some people tend to forget that, but in fact you are their boss. Even though it's kinda hard to fire them if they fuck up, their union must be insanely strong. I mean, do you know anyone else who has a 4 or even 6 years notice period?

          • Well, watching that your employees are doing their job is part of a boss' job.

            Which is why I put "not being paid" in that sentence.

            Also, the "you're the boss of your government" is a rationalization to the little power you actually have over the federal government. I can't fire them, tell them to do something, hold them accountable, or even get straight answers from them. In reality, I'm a shareholder. I have my say, but I'm hardly a boss.

      • Which is unfortunate but true. Most people do not care about their government.

        A slight exaggeration. We care, but we cannot follow along with it all day long, down to detailed minutia and throwing Filibuster Parties, complete with chips and dip. This ignores what they do when not in session, where the real wheeling and dealing is done. Everyone has an important part to contribute to society, for us, it's our day jobs. We need to supervise the government and ensure that the right trade-offs are being made.

        We

      • That's basically why they choose a service like YouTube. Imagine you could and, say, 5 years from now you could open a page that showed us just what our representatives said 5 years ago.

        Ponder for a moment what kind of insight you'd gain into current politics if you could watch, say, some speeches of Sen. McCarthy.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by jellomizer (103300)

      Cspan and this is not meant to be popular. But government transparency. So you know there is a bill on something you feel strong about you can watch the debate, see who is for it who is against it. And not just go those damn republicans or damn democrats. But see who of those voted where, and if the opposition actually gave a good reason or not.

      I doubt everyone will watch it like a TV show, but if something you feel important then you just may watch it.

    • by Hadlock (143607)

      Yeah but when watching C-Span for the most part it's live house/senate coverage; you might watch for a week straight and never see your elected rep on camera. Super, ultra-mega boring. This allows you to keep an eye on your elected official and review if what he says is in line with your views or not, as opposed to what he says on the campaign trail. Plus, unlike the Obama videos, you can comment on them, so you can see what others are saying about him.

  • by eln (21727) on Wednesday January 14, 2009 @12:22PM (#26451351) Homepage

    United States Congress: After Dark

  • Can't wait to see floor sessions with all those snarky word balloons superimposed everywhere.
  • I'll be impressed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MikeRT (947531) on Wednesday January 14, 2009 @12:26PM (#26451451) Homepage

    When the federal budget is released in a well-documented, well-designed XML file format.

  • Hmm (Score:3, Insightful)

    by invisibleairwaves (1266542) on Wednesday January 14, 2009 @12:30PM (#26451551)

    Ideally this will bring transparency to citizens and inform them of their senators & representatives positions and ideas.

    +5 Funny.

  • I just saw one (Score:3, Insightful)

    by paiute (550198) on Wednesday January 14, 2009 @12:30PM (#26451553)

    Check out the A bill to provide authority for the Federal Government to purchase and insure certain types of troubled assets for the purposes of providing stability to and preventing disruption in the economy and financial system and protecting taxpayers, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide incentives for energy production and conservation, to extend certain expiring provisions, to provide individual income tax relief, and for other purposes remix featuring Bun B and Lil Wayne.

    Killer!

  • So I can watch my government officials with inserted annoying advertisements, with crappy video that's blocky and looks like an angry fruit salad, and I can't save it to my own computer or give it to my friends because it would violate the TOS. Wow. There's a token gesture to government accessibility if I ever saw one.

    It's almost as bad as the signs at the county service center, where they print in 13 languages "Warning! Big guy with gun go smack smack if past this point you go." Ah, but all the other signs

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Utini420 (444935)

      I'm not sure what you're complaining about here. The first bit, I get -- YouTube looks like crap and its a pain to save. Got it. But is the second bit:

      1. The signs have too many languages
      2. The signs are written poorly
      3. The card at the counter doesn't contain these other languages

      or (and I suspect its this one)

      4. The person at the counter only speaks English

      If it is 4, I will pull up just short of saying, "Folks living in America really outta learn English," and instead I'll go with, "My tax dollars can

      • I think you missed my point. It's that the so-called "accessibility" to these services is a patchwork of inconsistencies that fail to accomplish its main purpose -- which is providing services to all of its citizens. If they're going to be multi-lingual, they should make a proper go of it. As it is now, we all have to search the giant displays for the 10-point sized english text buried somewhere in with a few dozen other languages in a half dozen fonts at different sizes, weights... These posters look more

        • Don't worry, you missed his point too:

          What he wrote:
          >but I'm also all about folks speaking English in America.

          What you wrote:
          >And yes, I agree with you - you should learn to speak the native languages of this country.

          Seems we shouldn't bother with the extra languages until we can get people that claim to speak English to actually understand English.

          • Please read the entire sentence before replying. -_- I was telling him in so many words to frack off, because English is not the native language. And I support multi-lingual resources. I think their implementation to date is full of suck, however.

            • by Neoprofin (871029)
              And he didn't say a word about English being the native language, he said people should speak it. It is by far the most common language in America, and last I checked the most common second language in the world. Not one word about it being native, but plenty to say about it making your life a lot easier.

              In the enlightened words of Jules, "English, motherfucker! Do you speak it?"
  • by johnny cashed (590023) on Wednesday January 14, 2009 @12:37PM (#26451721) Homepage
    If youtube is going to start carrying government videos, presumably funded by taxpayers, the videos need to be public domain and youtube needs to have a built in mechanism to allow views to save the video. I know there are ways of saving the videos already, but youtube does not provide this functionality.
    • If youtube is going to start carrying government videos, presumably funded by taxpayers, the videos need to be public domain and youtube needs to have a built in mechanism to allow views to save the video.

      Sure, if they are produced by the US government, they have to be in the public domain, but why does Google need to change the features of its service if the government chooses to submit videos to the existing service with the existing features?

    • If youtube is going to start carrying government videos, presumably funded by taxpayers, the videos need to be public domain and youtube needs to have a built in mechanism to allow views to save the video. I know there are ways of saving the videos already, but youtube does not provide this functionality.

      Google videos does, and it is still operational I believe. All it would take is for Google to mirror a copy of the YouTube video on the Google videos sites.

  • Plan B (Score:3, Funny)

    by pak9rabid (1011935) on Wednesday January 14, 2009 @12:41PM (#26451795)
    Sweet...I need a good plan B for when melatonin [wikipedia.org] doesn't work.
  • Anyone find anything that is captioned? Looks like YouTube changed their ToS so the Feds are not endorsing idenification.
  • Any particular reason they can't host this content on a .gov server that I could possibly get to from work?

    Sorry, just find it annoying to see yet another VERY large victim join the YouTube/MySpace/Facebook herd.

    Of course, this also begs the question as to who will be the first to censor this type of content too, yet another issue with relying upon others to host your content.

    • by DragonWriter (970822) on Wednesday January 14, 2009 @01:01PM (#26452193)

      Any particular reason they can't host this content on a .gov server that I could possibly get to from work?

      Having it hosted on YouTube doesn't cost the taxpayer anything for hosting and distribution, whereas hosting it on a .gov server would have a cost to the taxpayer.

  • ....in which she rickrolls the taxpaying public [youtube.com] 37 seconds into her Cat Cam video?? (Kudos to TC for posting it...)
    • by Neoprofin (871029)
      We were all trying to wait a couple hours before we started pointing out what a massive waste of time most of our elected officials are.
  • Of course these videos won't make any sense until they are buffalaxed. [youtube.com]

    All along watching you pumping my retard!

  • " Ideally this will bring transparency to citizens and inform them of their senators' & representatives' positions and ideas."

    Good Luck with that!

  • It only seems fair that they allow us back stage when we're forced to allow them in our back doors.

  • That was an original constraint of YouTube. That could make it worth it. If you can't say it in five minutes, then you can't say it.
  • pour her heart out and cry on camera under the name LonelyCongresswoman65?
  • Ideally this will bring transparency to citizens and inform them of their senators' & representatives' positions and ideas.

    Ha ha ha ha ha! You kids these days with your crazy talk! :-)

  • Yay, we can expose video of processions that favor public opinion, and bury other processions! We should take the important discussions (lobbying etc) outside the house and senate, of course, to increase public integrity.
  • <b>Adding comments has been disabled for this video.</b><br><br>Only trolls and intellectual cowards do this with their videos.

Thufir's a Harkonnen now.

Working...