I like this question and think it’s an important issue for the candidates to discuss.  As you indicate, there is a real scarcity of coverage of international issues in the mainstream US media.  I think this follows in part from a presumed disinterest of the US public about matters not explicitly related to this country, but it also follows from the institutional and economic structures of the US telecommunications industry.  As such, this issue could be addressed in large part by changes in telecommunications policy. 

The weaknesses of public media in the United States­, which has suffered severely under the current administration­, means that there are few widely distributed non-commercial outlets for international and other news.  Because international media isn’t seen as a big money maker, corporate media outlets and advertisers aren’t quick to push this coverage.  Strengthening the public media in the US would help in addressing this issue, since they would presumably offer coverage that didn’t place profit motives ahead of their concerns for public dialog (or at least not as explicitly as the corporate media outlets). 

Historically, the mainstream, corporate media have strongly resisted government mandates for particular types of coverage, or have agreed to take it upon themselves to offer particular kinds of programs (e.g. educational radio shows), only to renege on that promise later.  It would be worthwhile to press the big media conglomerates to move in these directions, but it would require some political or economic consequence.

In terms of the video itself, if you want to get in on the air, I think you need to start by changing your t-shirt!  I would worry that CNN would not want to appear to be promoting a company by including a kind of “product placement” (they might be particularly concerned about a beer t-shirt, though I imagine that any brand would create a similar problem).  Also, if you have the option, the “jump cut” at 14 seconds could be smoothed out a bit.  It’s clear that this was edited.  The problem with editing with a static camera is that cuts can appear choppy or abrupt (the camera angle needs to change in order to avoid this choppy feel).  If you want to zoom in closer, you might consider a continuous zoom starting at 12 or so seconds and ending at 14.  This would give the video a slightly more professional feel.

Is this a good question?Yes.  Though there might be other ways to get the candidates to talk about the heart of this issue.  For instance, a question about media conglomerates or funding for public media would be a bit more specific, and might make this question slightly more difficult to dodge.  Likewise, as an international citizen, the questioner would have a particularly strong “ethos” in terms of a question about public media, since so many other countries have much stronger commitments to public broadcasting.

How might different candidates respond to the question?I imagine that all of the candidates (both Republican and Democrat) would agree that there was insufficient coverage of international issues, though I think most would be extremely hesitant to suggest telecommunications policy changes.  The Republican candidates would likely be especially against this, as Republicans have claimed to be against such regulation (though they have few qualms about regulating independent, low-power, non-corporate radio stations) and have played a large part in the current deregulation of mainstream media. 

Likewise, since your question pushes for telecommunication policy changes that might be against the economic interests of the dominant media corporations (including the interests behind CNN), the candidates would likely worry about being ostracized by the outlets they need for campaign coverage.  This is an ongoing problem, and one of the reasons your question is so relevant (but also somewhat unlikely to get a truly meaningful response). 

What stakes does the question reveal?This question points to some powerful economic and policy issues concerning the US media industry, as I’ve suggested above.  One of the issues with a commercial, free-market media industry is that any programming that doesn’t make money won’t make it on the air.  This isn’t to say that viewers always get what they want.  If a network can produce programs cheaply (like reality television programming), or if advertisers can find a good “niche market” through an otherwise unpopular program, then they might still be seen as good investment. 

Because so much international news coverage is by nature highly politicized, too many media outlets see it as economically dangerous.  It’s much safer to show puffy human interest stories or entertainment programs that don’t run the risk of alienating viewers or political decision makers of a particular political bent.  “Market censorship” might be less insidious or violent than government censorship, but it can have the same impact on the viewing audience­limiting their access to particular kinds of information and stories.

What do you make of the “YouTube” debate question format?I watched the Democratic “YouTube” debate and appreciated the directness and thoughtfulness of many of the questions (as I appreciate the directness and thoughtfulness of yours).  I don’t know that this forced the candidates to move beyond their talking points, but it did force them to answer to a variety of citizens from across the country.  It also suggested the value of citizens’ voices in the political processes.  The country got to watch as their neighbors posed questions.  And every citizen who made a video that wasn’t shown, still spent a bit of time thinking about what they would ask the candidates if they could.  More participation is always a good idea!

Is it legitimate for international citizens to ask questions of political candidates in the United States?Of course!  As your own questions hints, we’re all connected to each other and the decisions of one country can have lasting consequences for others.  US citizens need to have good international information available to them, and US presidential candidates need to show that they can speak to the international community.