Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 18 Share on Twitter Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
OpEdNews Op Eds   

Take Back Control of Debates From the Networks

By       (Page 1 of 1 pages)   23 comments
How About Debate Integrity... and taking control back from the networks? It's time for the major parties to refuse to allow the networks to plan, script and program debates. They've made it clear they are incapable of doing what's best for Americans, for democracy.

The ABC Gibson-Stephanopolous debate was, perhaps more than anything else, a profound insult to Americans. The failure of ABC's leadership up and down the corporate ladder makes it clear that the network no longer has the right or privilege to call the shots on the contents or script for a debate. Other networks have not done much better with their "gotcha" questions and their agenda of catching soundbytes for later use against candidates.

The state of presidential debates has hit such lows it is no longer acceptable for the networks to determine what questions are asked. The fact that Stephanopolous so transparently replicated right wing screed-meister Sean Hannity's suggested question is unpardonable. The fact that Stephanopolous was given a job by Clinton's husband is unpardonable.

The answer is to set some standards for debates. It's time to remove the fake, media created issues from debates. It may be that some campaign strategists put the dirt and attacks on character, history and personality out there. It may be that candidates do it, but that does not mean this has to come up in debates. Debates should be forums where candidates define and make clear who they are and where they stand on issues.

The questions presented to debaters have been limited to insultingly short time limits  designed to maximize the networks' capture of soundbytes. It takes more time to give intelligent, fleshed out answers and the candidates should be according such time.

Questions should aim to bring new information to light. They should help viewers to learn new things about the candidates. They should bring up the issues that voters care about the most. They should bring up news that is substantive.

America deserves better. The DNC and the RNC should simply take Control of the debates away from the networks. They should offer the networks the opportunity to broadcast debates run by the league of women voters, by the DNC, by a coalition of editors of newspapers, by an assembly of leaders of compatible blogs... there are ways to do it that, using some rules and standards, filter and throw out the pure debate question garbage Gibson and Stephanopolous ignominiously waded neck deep into.

Part of the problem is the major political parties ALLOWED the networks to take over. The parties are partly to blame. That means the members of the parties-- YOU-- have to give them notice that they made a huge, unacceptable mistake and they have to fix it.

Howard Dean-- you blew it. DNC leaders-- you blew it. Now go take back the debates from the networks and clean your mess up. The real issues can and will be just as or more telegenic. And even if some questions are not sexy or exciting, that's okay. The networks are given licenses to our airwaves to serve us. There is no more important way than broadcasting the discussions that form such a key element of our democracy.

I've written that the Dems should literally refuse to appear on FOX. They actually did it during the primary season. I think it was the right thing to do. The Dems, at the least, need to do the same thing to ALL the networks, set standards where the control of the debate, even the use of camera shots of the audience, which ABC used in a biased way, only showing Clinton people, is determined based on pre-arranged rules. IF they do that, it may even work to allow FOX to broadcast a debate. But they won't be running it. A network should never, ever again run a presidential debate again. They've shown they are unable to do the job that we the people deserve.
Rate It | View Ratings

Rob Kall Social Media Pages: Facebook Page       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Rob Kall is an award winning journalist, inventor, software architect, connector and visionary. His work and his writing have been featured in the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, CNN, ABC, the HuffingtonPost, Success, Discover and other media. 

Check out his platform at

He is the author of The Bottom-up Revolution; Mastering the Emerging World of Connectivity

He's given talks and workshops to Fortune 500 execs and national medical and psychological organizations, and pioneered first-of-their-kind conferences in Positive Psychology, Brain Science and Story. He hosts some of the world's smartest, most interesting and powerful people on his Bottom Up Radio Show, and founded and publishes one of the top Google- ranked progressive news and opinion sites,

more detailed bio: 

Rob Kall has spent his adult life as an awakener and empowerer-- first in the field of biofeedback, inventing products, developing software and a music recording label, MuPsych, within the company he founded in 1978-- Futurehealth, and founding, organizing and running 3 conferences: Winter Brain, on Neurofeedback and consciousness, Optimal Functioning and Positive Psychology (a pioneer in the field of Positive Psychology, first presenting workshops on it in 1985) and Storycon Summit Meeting on the Art Science and Application of Story-- each the first of their kind.  Then, when he found the process of raising people's consciousness and empowering them to take more control of their lives  one person at a time was too slow, he founded which has been the top search result on Google for the terms liberal news and progressive opinion for several years. Rob began his Bottom-up Radio show, broadcast on WNJC 1360 AM to Metro Philly, also available on iTunes, covering the transition of our culture, business and world from predominantly Top-down (hierarchical, centralized, authoritarian, patriarchal, big)  to bottom-up (egalitarian, local, interdependent, grassroots, archetypal feminine and small.) Recent long-term projects include a book, Bottom-up-- The Connection Revolution, debillionairizing the planet (more...)

Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Follow Me on Twitter     Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEd News Newsletter
   (Opens new browser window)

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

A Conspiracy Conspiracy Theory

Debunking Hillary's Specious Winning the Popular Vote Claim

Terrifying Video: "I Don't Need a Warrant, Ma'am, Under Federal Law"

Ray McGovern Discusses Brutal Arrest at Secretary Clinton's Internet Freedom Speech

Hillary's Disingenuous Claim That She's Won 2.5 Million More Votes is Bogus. Here's why

Cindy Sheehan Bugged in Denver

To View Comments or Join the Conversation:

Tell A Friend