Already a member?
Sign in
In Favor of the Front Runners: Bias in the Democratic Presidential Primary Debates |
Version Compare
| Version | User | Scope of changes |
|---|---|---|
| Nov 14 2007, 10:35 PM EST (current) | brm237 | 10 words added, 1 word deleted |
| Nov 14 2007, 10:32 PM EST | brm237 | 75 words added, 61 words deleted |
Changes
Key: Additions Deletions
by Ben Muessig
Long before campaign commercials hit the airwaves, in the months when prospective candidates' bank accounts are still swelling in preparation for an election that remains a year away, the debates are already raging.
Since April, there have been 16 debates and forums for Democratic and Republican primary candidates. Primary debates have been around since 1948, when the Republican Party first put two of its potential candidates toe-to-toe, but in the 59 years since, debates have grown in size and frequency. By the 1970s, candidates from both parties participated in multiple primary debates (Benoit, Pier, Brazeal, McHale, Klyukovski, Airne, 133-135). More debates did not necessarily make things merrier. In 1988, Kathleen Hall Jamieson and David S. Birdsell wrote, "[t]he unprecedented number of debates in the 1988 primaries devalued debate as an activity. From a special event, worthy of unique attention, debates slipped to being a routine part of life, of no special note" (120). There were 22 primary debates in 1988 (Benoit, Pier, Brazeal, McHale, Klyukovski, Airne, 133-135). The number of primary debates has continued to rise. In the 2007-2008 season, there are 31 scheduled debates.
Media activists and scholars have argued that debates in their current manifestation are flawed. Sidney Kraus writes that "[p]olitical pundits, scholars, and other critics have argued that format (in the broadest sense), more than any other element was responsible for the damaging aspects of the telecasts to one or other of the candidates" (31). Media upstarts such as and 10questions.com argue that, "[o]ld-fashioned televised debates have their value, but TV has several inherent limits. Only a few people get to ask questions. The candidates have very little time to answer, forcing them to speak in canned sound-bites. And the audience has no way of providing meaningful feedback. If the candidate doesn't answer the question, we have no way of pushing them to do so."
Despite these critiques, the number of "old-fashioned televised debates" continues to grow. Primary debates have greatly expanded since the days of one-on-one match-ups (Benoit, Pier, Brazeal, McHale, Klyukovski, Airne, 133-135). In the 2007-2008 debate season, as many as seven candidates take part in each party's debates.Although there are a greater number of candidates contributing their voices to public discourse, some candidates have better chances than others to have their voices heard. Current conventions ensure that debates are not contests of decibels, but rather contests of content. Unfortunately, debates block some candidates from having the chance to share their content.
The MSNBC Democratic Primary Debate, held on October 30th at Drexel University in Philadelphia, PA, showcased the bias of the Democratic debates towards "front-runners." Journalists Brian Williams and Tim Russert acted as moderators, askingoften directing questions at each candidate individually. The moderators asked Clinton the most questions. With 24 prompts, she received four times as many questions as Richardson, who received the least, with only 6. Obama, the second leading "front runner," received 16 questions – twice as many as Kucinich, Biden, and Dodd. Moderators directed 14 questions to Edwards, the third-place "front-runner." As a group, the three "front-runners" received 54 prompts while the other four candidates received only thirty questions, combined. "Front-runners" had a greater opportunity to receive repeated prompts on a single topic. These responses include follow-up questions as well as uniqe prompts. Moderators asked Clinton five questions about how she would handle growing tensions with Iran, four questions about her political experience and the political experiences of other candidates, and three questions about taxation. Edwards received four questions about Clinton's accountability. Obama received three. Kucinich, Biden, Dodd and Richardson received two prompts only once – on the topic of Iran.
"I wondered why they even had [Kucinich] there – they hardly asked him a thing," said Katie Chao, an NYU student who watched the October 30th Democratic primary debate.
The Third Democratic Primary Presidential Debate, hosted by Howard University in Washington, D.C. on June 28th, was a beacon of fairness amongst its biased brethren. Unlike other debates in which moderators tailored questions for certain candidates, the Howard University Debate forced the seven participating candidates (Clinton, Obama, Edwards, Kucinich, Biden, Dodd, and Gravel) to answer the same eight questions. While in other debates, follow-up questions kept the focus on the "front-runners," the Howard University Debate gave each candidate the same amount of response time while eliminating follow-ups entirely. While other debates included brief lightning rounds (3 questions in the MSNBC Debate and 2 questions in the August 26th New Hampshire Debate), the Howard University Debate was in a way, an extended "lightning round." With each question, moderators rotated the order in which the candidates responded, guaranteeing a format that placed each candidate in the strategic disadvantage of answering first. The Howard University Debate gave all candidates an equal opportunity to expound upon topics including the genocide in Darfur, Katrina's displacement of New Orleans area residents, racism among police forces, and policies concerning outsourcing.
Long before campaign commercials hit the airwaves, in the months when prospective candidates' bank accounts are still swelling in preparation for an election that remains a year away, the debates are already raging.
Since April, there have been 16 debates and forums for Democratic and Republican primary candidates. Primary debates have been around since 1948, when the Republican Party first put two of its potential candidates toe-to-toe, but in the 59 years since, debates have grown in size and frequency. By the 1970s, candidates from both parties participated in multiple primary debates (Benoit, Pier, Brazeal, McHale, Klyukovski, Airne, 133-135). More debates did not necessarily make things merrier. In 1988, Kathleen Hall Jamieson and David S. Birdsell wrote, "[t]he unprecedented number of debates in the 1988 primaries devalued debate as an activity. From a special event, worthy of unique attention, debates slipped to being a routine part of life, of no special note" (120). There were 22 primary debates in 1988 (Benoit, Pier, Brazeal, McHale, Klyukovski, Airne, 133-135). The number of primary debates has continued to rise. In the 2007-2008 season, there are 31 scheduled debates.
Media activists and scholars have argued that debates in their current manifestation are flawed. Sidney Kraus writes that "[p]olitical pundits, scholars, and other critics have argued that format (in the broadest sense), more than any other element was responsible for the damaging aspects of the telecasts to one or other of the candidates" (31). Media upstarts such as and 10questions.com argue that, "[o]ld-fashioned televised debates have their value, but TV has several inherent limits. Only a few people get to ask questions. The candidates have very little time to answer, forcing them to speak in canned sound-bites. And the audience has no way of providing meaningful feedback. If the candidate doesn't answer the question, we have no way of pushing them to do so."
Despite these critiques, the number of "old-fashioned televised debates" continues to grow. Primary debates have greatly expanded since the days of one-on-one match-ups (Benoit, Pier, Brazeal, McHale, Klyukovski, Airne, 133-135). In the 2007-2008 debate season, as many as seven candidates take part in each party's debates.Although there are a greater number of candidates contributing their voices to public discourse, some candidates have better chances than others to have their voices heard. Current conventions ensure that debates are not contests of decibels, but rather contests of content. Unfortunately, debates block some candidates from having the chance to share their content.
"A fundamental assumption behind debates," writes Kraus, "is that true arguments can always be presented more persuasively than false arguments if the situation in which the arguments are presented is arranged so that all participants have equal opportunity" (31). Kraus argues that debates are flawed if candidates lack an equal opportunity to express their views. Research focused on four recent Democratic primary debates raises questions surrounding Kraus' fundamental assumption.
News agencies including CNN, MSNBC and Fox News, which host and broadcast many of the Democratic primary debates, have determined the "front-runners" of the Democratic primaries to be Hillary Clinton, Barrack Obama and John Edwards. As early as February(23 months before inauguration) these candidates were deemed "front-runners" –positions they have maintained ever since. Media organizations including the New York Times have simplified their coverage of the election, focusing primarily on these three, high profile candidates. In many of the Democratic primary debates, the "front-running" candidates have received more attention than the other candidates. A detailed analysis of the number of questions asked to each candidate at four recent Democratic presidential primary debates highlights a pattern of "front-runner" favoritism that extends beyond news coverage and into the debates themselves.
The MSNBC Democratic Primary Debate, held on October 30th at Drexel University in Philadelphia, PA, showcased the bias of the Democratic debates towards "front-runners." Journalists Brian Williams and Tim Russert acted as moderators, askingoften directing questions at each candidate individually. The moderators asked Clinton the most questions. With 24 prompts, she received four times as many questions as Richardson, who received the least, with only 6. Obama, the second leading "front runner," received 16 questions – twice as many as Kucinich, Biden, and Dodd. Moderators directed 14 questions to Edwards, the third-place "front-runner." As a group, the three "front-runners" received 54 prompts while the other four candidates received only thirty questions, combined. "Front-runners" had a greater opportunity to receive repeated prompts on a single topic. These responses include follow-up questions as well as uniqe prompts. Moderators asked Clinton five questions about how she would handle growing tensions with Iran, four questions about her political experience and the political experiences of other candidates, and three questions about taxation. Edwards received four questions about Clinton's accountability. Obama received three. Kucinich, Biden, Dodd and Richardson received two prompts only once – on the topic of Iran.
"I wondered why they even had [Kucinich] there – they hardly asked him a thing," said Katie Chao, an NYU student who watched the October 30th Democratic primary debate.
"There isn't even lip service paid to giving [all of the candidates] equal time," said Josh Levy, associate editor of 10questions.com, a website that offers candidates the opportunity to create video responses to online questions submitted by the general public. "If you look at the placement [at televised debates], they're all placed in a semi circle with Clinton, Obama and Edwards in the middle. The more moderate guys are beside them. The bigger of a wack job the further towards the perimeter you are – so Kucinich is furthest to theleft."
The New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Candidates Debate, held on August 26 at Dartmouth College, further exemplified the problems plaguing this year's debates. Moderators directed 29 questions to Clinton, 19 to Obama, and 17 to Edwards. The candidates who are not considered "front-runners" received fewer questions, with 15 going to Biden, 14 to Richardson, 11 to Kucinich, and 10 to Gravel. Clinton also received the most questions on a single subject, with six concerning social security and Medicare, four on torture, and four on campaign donations.
An earlier New Hampshire Democratic Presidential Candidates Debate, held on June 3, showed a similar, though less-pronounced distribution. Moderators asked the two leading "front-runners" – Clinton and Obama – 18 and 19 questions respectively. Richardson broke the streak of "front-runner" dominance by landing 15 questions, though four of those questions were follow-ups to a single prompt on the crisis in Darfur. Edwards followed with 14 questions. The rest of the results followed the familiar pattern, with Biden, Kucinich and Dodd answering 11, 10, and 9 questions each. Gravel received the fewest questions with 7.
The Third Democratic Primary Presidential Debate, hosted by Howard University in Washington, D.C. on June 28th, was a beacon of fairness amongst its biased brethren. Unlike other debates in which moderators tailored questions for certain candidates, the Howard University Debate forced the seven participating candidates (Clinton, Obama, Edwards, Kucinich, Biden, Dodd, and Gravel) to answer the same eight questions. While in other debates, follow-up questions kept the focus on the "front-runners," the Howard University Debate gave each candidate the same amount of response time while eliminating follow-ups entirely. While other debates included brief lightning rounds (3 questions in the MSNBC Debate and 2 questions in the August 26th New Hampshire Debate), the Howard University Debate was in a way, an extended "lightning round." With each question, moderators rotated the order in which the candidates responded, guaranteeing a format that placed each candidate in the strategic disadvantage of answering first. The Howard University Debate gave all candidates an equal opportunity to expound upon topics including the genocide in Darfur, Katrina's displacement of New Orleans area residents, racism among police forces, and policies concerning outsourcing.
In the Howard University debate, each candidate answered the same number of questions. In the other Democratic primary debates – in which candidates were not guaranteed an opportunity to answer each question – the "front-runners" have an advantage. In these three debates, the three "front runners" received 170 questions (54 percent), while the five other candidates received 145 questions (46 percent). Although this research illuminates an often-overlooked problem with the primary debate system, it is by no means conclusive. A variety of variables could have skewed the study, such as the fact that the research does not take into account the candidates' diverse response styles. When a candidate dodges a question, there is often a follow-up quesiton. This study has included follow-ups as unique prompts, resulting in findings that could depict evasive maneuvers as a structural bias.
Benoit, William L., P.M. Pier, LeAnn M. Brazeal, John P. McHale, Andrew Klyukovski and David Airne. The Primary Decision: A Functional Analysis of Debates in Presidential Primaries.Westport, Connecticut: Praeger, 2002.
Jamieson,Kathleen Hall and David S. Birdsell, Presidential Debates: The Challenge of Creating an Informed Electorate. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988.
Kraus, Sidney. Televised Presidential Debates and Public Policy. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1988.