The debates that occur before elections are a crucial element of our democracy. They give voters the chance to directly question their opponents and compare them on a variety of issues. They also provide voters with information about the candidates that can’t be obtained in the limited space of a campaign event or newspaper article. They have the potential to be a game-changer in an election, as was the case for JFK and Nixon in 1960.
Traditionally, a debate format includes a fair division of time among candidates for both opening and closing statements as well as questions. The questions are usually selected in advance by the moderator, with the support of a panel of experts or the public. Questions are then grouped into categories or topics for a particular debate, and the candidates take turns answering the questions and giving rebuttals. In some formats, the moderator may also select follow-up questions or ask a series of non-debate related questions. This can lead to questions that serve to advance the news agenda rather than helping the public understand the candidates’ plans and positions on issues.
Many viewers, particularly younger audiences, want a new kind of debate that shifts away from the blame-and-shame culture and opens up space for calm and curious discussion. In this context, new debate formats are more important than ever. A recent Hart Research report found that “a majority of young voters say they are following this year’s presidential debates on social media and are interested in seeing more innovative formats.”
About the Author
