Networks Have No Business Hosting Debates
Yesterday, I argued that Fox News has good reasons for excluding long-shot candidates like Ron Paul from presidential debates -- at least if the alternative is allowing them on stage but denying them time to speak.
But that's an imperfect solution. Here's a perfect one: TV networks should stop hosting debates.
What is a debate, after all? It's a news event, or it's supposed to be, anyway. And journalistic enterprises aren't supposed to host events -- they're supposed to cover them. Would CBS News or CNN "host" the Inauguration, or a Senate hearing, or a State of the Union address? Those are all, in one way or another, staged events, but the networks handle them, properly, as news.
There's a good business rationale for doing it the other way, of course. If all the networks were to cover each debate, the ratings for each network's broadcast would be low. By taking turns, each network ensures strong ratings for the debates it does host and is able to draw better ratings by counter-programming when it's somebody else's turn.
But at what cost? Just look at what it's meant for CNN. Democratic candidates have refused to debate on Fox, which they see as hostile ground. By agreeing to debate on CNN, therefore, they are essentially bestowing their seal of approval on it -- undermining CNN's independence and lending credibility to the charge that it favors Democrats.
And, claims of party-line bias aside, who wants to be the network that politicians trust to make them look good, anyway?
Networks, do yourselves a favor: Let the political parties organize their own primary debates. Let them decide who gets to participate, or what the criteria ought to be for inclusion. (In this case that would mean letting Paul and Duncan Hunter in on the action, since that's what the New Hampshire Republicans favor.) Let them attempt the thankless task of balancing breadth of choice against depth of discussion. And after all that, if they still want Wolf or Brit or Brian or Katie to moderate, by all means, lend them out, but under the understanding they do it as guests, not hosts.
- Late Breaks: 'WSJ' vs. 'NYT,' Layoff Roundup, more
- Nov 21 2008 4:48PM EST
- Duly Quoted: Was 'WSJ' a Big Fat Waste of Dough?
- Nov 21 2008 4:10PM EST
- How Dividend Cut Puts NYT's Future in Play
- Nov 21 2008 10:52AM EST
- Idle Chatter: Ted's Sales; Angelina's Leverage
- Nov 21 2008 8:37AM EST
- Late Breaks: Slimming Down AP, and Fat Kids
- Nov 20 2008 5:39PM EST
- New York Times Co. Slashes Dividend
- Nov 20 2008 4:17PM EST
- Oprah Headmistress to Drop Suit Against Huffpo
- Nov 20 2008 2:43PM EST
- News Corp. Re-ups Ailes as Fox News Chief
- Nov 20 2008 1:29PM EST
- Garfield: There's No Future Model for Online News
- Nov 20 2008 11:23AM EST
- Idle Chatter: Bad Day to Own Media Stock
- Nov 20 2008 8:35AM EST
- Late Breaks: Steve Jobs Blogger Gagged, more
- Nov 19 2008 5:36PM EST
- AMI Chief Asks Employees to Back Auto Bailout
- Nov 19 2008 2:49PM EST
- 'PC Magazine' Crossing the Digital-Only Frontier
- Nov 19 2008 12:25PM EST
- Number Crunch: Downsizing at the Business Mags
- Nov 19 2008 11:10AM EST
- Idle Chatter: 'Cottage' Carnage at Time Inc., more
- Nov 19 2008 8:20AM EST
Categories
Links
- Contact Me
- News After Newspapers
- Romenesko

- Gawker

- Ad Age

- WWD's Memo Pad

- Keith Kelly

- NYT Media

- Jon Fine

- TVNewser

- Magazine Death Pool

- HuffPo Media

- Radar

- Galleycat

- Book Standard

- News Hounds

- Newsbusters

- Jezebel

- CBS Public Eye

- Editor & Publisher

- Hollywood Wiretap

- The Media Pundit

- FAIR

- I Want Media

- Viral Video

- Nikki Finke

- MediaFile

- Silicon Alley Insider

- Paid Content

- Valleywag

- Channel '08 -- Campaign Ads

- Cover Awards

- Talking Biz News

- SI.com - Richard Deitsch

- Gapper Blog - Media

- Jon Friedman










