Debate is a valuable tool for sharpening the views of candidates and the public in an intensely focused environment. It helps voters understand where candidates stand and what the consequences of various policy options might be. This is especially important as the pace of technological change continues to outpace our ability to monitor and assess its impacts.
But in our politically polarized times, many Americans feel frustrated and disengaged with political debate. Heightened partisanship has left some thinking that it is unproductive and only adds to the divisiveness of our politics. And they may be right, but they are also misperceiving debate in a profound way.
This misperception is the focus of new research from Columbia Business School professor Modupe Akinola and UC Berkeley professor Sheena Iyengar. They and their coauthors found that Americans widely overestimate the frequency of presidential and congressional political debate, as well as how much time is spent debating in a typical televised debate.
Until recently, most of the CPD’s debates were hosted by local television and radio stations and universities. Today, the CPD advises sponsors of non-presidential debates (gubernatorial, congressional, mayor, state legislative and city council) who seek advice on production issues as well as ways to integrate debates with voter education initiatives.
The CPD selects sites and dates for its debates approximately one year in advance; this allows the full range of logistical preparation to be completed in a timely manner. The CPD chooses the sites for its debates with a view to maximizing the number of people who might be able to attend in order to foster the most expansive dialogue possible and maximize the impact of these important civic education events. The CPD also carefully considers the dates on which early voting and religious and federal holidays will occur, as well as any major TV pool contractual conflicts with the White House television network in its debate selection process.
About the Author
