The CNN/YouTube GOP presidential debate Wednesday night was the most watched primary debate in the history of cable news. The latter and more controversial half of the CNN/YouTube moniker seems responsible for this phenomenon, but clearly, the debate has done something right if it has prompted record numbers of people to tune in to presidential politics.

Undoubtedly, the CNN/YouTube debates make for better entertainment than the standard cable debate format. This does not necessarily make them more useful or more productive, but they certainly have gotten widespread public attention, which should be welcomed as a step in the right direction. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, only 64 percent of U.S. citizens age 18 and over participated in the last presidential election, a 4 percent increase from the 2000 election. Even our best levels of civic engagement in the recent past have been dramatically lacking.

Of course, questions asked by cartoon snowmen or country troubadours may seem gaudy, perhaps indicating a misplaced emphasis on showmanship as opposed to informative content. But, let's not forget the oft-criticized snowman from the Democratic YouTube debate asked, perhaps immaturely, about the important issue of global warming. In a later debate with questions left to the discretion of professional journalist Tim Russert, the candidates were asked trivially, not to mention inappropriately, for their favorite Bible verse. Politicians may still attempt evasion of the questions, but this juxtaposition makes it hard to argue question caliber has declined as a result of the YouTube debates.

If anything, new life has been breathed into the debate. Voter-submitted questions present the most notable improvement to the forum, as they remind the candidates the public exists to hold them accountable for their answers. That CNN exercises a considerable amount of discretion in question selection creates concern, and the process might be more equitable if voters could select their favorite submissions on the debate Web site.

This format may not be the end-all, be-all of American presidential debate, but it does not cheapen the process. It makes it more accessible to the average American voter.