If I may, Mr. Reid, I agree that speech is meant to be persuasive, but I think there is something vivid about video broadcasting. It's one thing to say you want to object, for instance, to the policy position being taken by a member in a given speech, but we can all imagine how readily something could be just....
I think the gavel-to-gavel protection initially put in when the House decided it was going to broadcast its proceedings, both in committees and in the House, was to avoid the possibility that there would be things taken out of context that could be terrifically damaging to a person. You can't unring the bell once that impression has been left.
I think it's more in that context, the idea being that if you're using a full exchange between people, then people can make up their minds for themselves. It's part of your argument about your position.
I think it's very easy to take things out of context and hold somebody up to ridicule. It's the same thing with the still images that are sometimes made from video. We've seen that, and it's not uncommon, certainly in--