Put the candidates in a cage and let them fight it out until there is only one left. Now that would boost TV ratings!
Posted on 11/02/2015 9:38:14 AM PST by Sean_Anthony
Clowns
Here was my favorite headline of the week: ‘Shell-shocked’ CNBC staffers had long flight home
Good. I hope they’re having a long and horrible week too. When you’re trusted with directing something as serious as a presidential debate, and instead you beclown yourself as these fools did, you don’t deserve any rest.
But this goes to a more fundamental problem about presidential debates in general, especially but not exclusively primary debates. When and why did we buy into the notion that debates must be led and directed by journalists prompting the participants with questions? Indeed, why do journalists get a participant role at all?
The only real reason we do this, as far as I can see, is that we’ve done it for a long time and we’re used to it. Well, that and the fact that because this is a longstanding practice the media organizations themselves approach the parties with proposals to host the debates. What they’re trying to do is what CNBC tried and failed spectacularly to do on Wednesday - boost their ratings and promote their on-air personalities. This is exactly why the moderators ask such idiotic questions. It’s not about helping the public better understand the candidates. It’s about making sure that the viewer remembers the name and the face of the person asking the question - and if the candidate stumbles over the question, so much the better.
When and why did we buy into the notion that debates must be led and directed by journalists prompting the participants with questions?
- - - - - -
When they were put on TV in a competitive ratings market.
I’m curious - did the Lincoln-Douglas debates have moderators asking questions?
No. They were organized by Lincoln and Douglas themselves. Newspapermen reported on them, but did not control them.
A good idea. The ubiquitous talking heads TV shows feature debates among several participants without much moderation; so, too, could the candidates conduct debates (round tables) with little moderation.
I like the idea of Levin, Rush and Hannity doing the questioning.
O’Reilly does not qualify.
It’s simpler than that. Just have the GOP choose the moderators.
Put the candidates in a cage and let them fight it out until there is only one left. Now that would boost TV ratings!
Rinse, bless his heart, was dropped on his pin head when young. He's a little slow.
God-awful. . .
Poor choice of words for the writer of this article.
I got a solution - let’s have the National Enquirer do the next debate.
Or Weekly World News, and have Bat Boy as the moderator.
Does anybody remember the name of this show? There are probably old reruns on youtube.
That’s probably the one. Thank you.
Use a Computer to ask the questions
I vaguely remember that program. College bowl???
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.