|
Dreary Formats
Under CPD sponsorship, the major party candidates secretly design all
the elements of the formats. Consequently, challenging questions, assertive
moderators, follow-up questions, candidate-to-candidate questioning, rebuttals
and surrebuttals are often excluded from the presidential debates. The CPD's
formats prevent in-depth examination of critical issues, and allow the candidates
to the deliver pre-packaged soundbites that are repeated over, and over,
and over again on the campaign trail.
At first glance, the CPD seems to have had a
neutral, if not positive, effect on presidential debate formats. Unlike
the League of Women Voters, the CPD managed to escape the restrictive
Press Panelist Format, which consisted of seated reporters asking all
the questions. The CPD hosted the first Single Moderator and Town Hall
presidential debates.
But the CPD never developed
the "new" formats. The major party candidates, for various reasons, chose
to break from the Press Panelist Format. For example, the CPD publicly
took credit for selecting the popular town-hall format when, in fact,
Governor Clinton came up with the format in 1992 because it paraded his
interpersonal skills.
Moreover, as a consequence
of major-party manipulation, a structural deficiency still mars all CPD-sponsored
debates: they are not really debates. Despite the purported format diversity,
the public is still left with glorified news conferences. The only difference
from joint news conference to joint news conference is who asks all the
questions - a panel of reporters or Jim Lehrer or a group of undecided
voters. The candidates never speak to each other, and because they are
peppered by a succession of disparate questions, they superficially glaze
over the issues, reciting a series of memorized soundbites. "It's too
much show business and too much prompting, too much artificiality, and
not really debates," said former President George Bush. "They're rehearsed
appearances."
Most importantly, while the basic formats have changed for the better, the structure and the rules governing them have become much worse. Candidates have extensively manipulated the details within the selected formats to eliminate the remaining shreds of spontaneity:
- When the League of Women Voters sponsored the debates, panelists and
moderators were always permitted follow-up questions, which allowed
them to get past rehearsed answers, really delve into an issue, and
challenge the responses of the candidates. But when the CPD took over,
the candidates banned or limited follow-up questions.
- The candidates have strictly prohibited themselves from questioning
each other. All the Memoranda of Understanding stipulate, "There will
be no direct candidate-to-candidate questioning."
- In 1980, the League of Women Voters selected Bill Moyers, "the conscience
of American journalism," to serve as moderator after consulting with
the Nieman Foundation, Pulitzer Prize authorities, the Radio and TV
News Directors Association, Newspaper Publishers' Association, and the
American Society of Newspaper Editors. It is unlikely, however, that
someone as engaging as Moyers will ever moderate a CPD-sponsored debate.
The CPD allows the major party candidates to handpick the panelists
and moderators. As to be expected, the candidates select moderators
and panelists who ask predictable, safe questions. In 1992, 1996 and
2000, the candidates selected Jim Lehrer, host of PBS's Newshour, to
moderate every presidential debate. Lehrer is a passive moderator who
doesn't believe in challenging the candidates. After the 2000 presidential
debates, Senator John Kerry said, "You could have picked 10 people off
the street who didn't know Jerusalem from Georgia and they would have
had better questions." [Note: Due to Open Debates' unprecedented
pressure, the CPD proposed moderators for the 2004 presidential debates
for the first time in the CPD's history. The Kerry and Bush campaigns
accepted those moderators, resulting in four different moderators for
the first time in 12 years. This is important victory for the
debate reform movement. However, had Kerry and Bush rejected the
CPD's proposed panelists -- which were partly chosen because of the
likelihood that the candidates would accept them -- the CPD would not
have publicly protested. ]
- According to polls and focus groups, the general public prefers debates that give candidates more time to answer questions. Restrictive time limits can reduce the candidates' responses to memorized soundbites. Nonetheless, response times have been severely whittled down under CPD sponsorship. In 1984, the LWV allotted the candidates 4.5 minutes per question sequence, whereas in 1996, the CPD limited the candidates' responses to a mere 90 seconds.
- Viewers and pundits have praised the town hall format for maximizing
spontaneity and citizen participation. But with no opposition from the
CPD, major party negotiators transformed the popular format into a staged
charade. In 1992, audience members could ask anything they wanted, including
follow-up questions. In 1996, follow-ups and questions seeking clarification
were banned. In 2000, the questions actually had to be written down
on index cards and screened by moderator Jim Lehrer before the debates.
In 2004, the questions had to be written down on index cards and screened
by moderator Charles Gibson before the debates, and any town hall audience
member who asked a question that differed from the question submitted
on the index card would have her micophone turned off.
The CPD is partly responsible for these format deficiencies. No other sponsor has allowed the major party candidates to negotiate exclusively. No other sponsor has implemented, without protest, Memoranda of Understanding that eliminate spontaneity, accountability and confrontation.
|
|