It is interesting, honest!
Did you watch the first ever UK general election TV debate last night? I didn't.
Half an hour beforehand my Dad rang me up to see if I would be watching and I said I didn't think any of them had anything of substance to say, so no. An hour later he called me to say that I'd made the right choice and he too was switching off, going on to mutter about having 30 minutes of his life stolen.
Web 2.0 - i.e. the web as a two-way communication medium - is far more advanced than it was at the last general election five years ago. As a result, many commentators are aflutter about how much more insight we're getting into the views of the electorate in the run-up, and how much more democratic being able to pump your every waking thought into the tweet-osytem, or whatever it's called this week, is.
To me there is a certain media desperation behind all this. The fact is this will be a close election not because the country is divided along profound ideological lines, but because most people feel disinclined to vote for any of the candidates. You get the feeling political journalists are trying to generate intrigue where there simply isn't any.
To a voter reduced to apathy and indifference by the bland, petty, homogeneity of all the leading parties - as I freely admit to being - no amount of breathless proclamations that, thanks to the Internet, we can now see the impact on the electorate of every syllable a party leader utters, within seconds of them doing so.
Here are the closing statements from the three party leaders, but you can watch the whole thing on YouTube if you really want.
