As a political process, debate is necessarily adversarial and combative. It’s not a neutral quest by all sides to find truth – it’s a struggle for power in which might makes right. Heightened polarization has left many people frustrated with the idea of political debate. They wonder what is the point of two people with different points of view trying to come to consensus when they’re often left feeling like they engaged in a conflict instead of a conversation?
But there is a way to make debates more productive. The key is to focus on the real goals of the process. In a series of studies, IGC researchers found that people who engage in more productive debates report being more informed and have more positive feelings toward their opponents after the discussion. The question is how to bring this to scale and ensure that the value of debates is delivered to voters around the world, especially in developing countries where democracy is still maturing.
The goal of election debates is to help citizens deliberate about their choices and become better informed about candidates’ positions, qualifications, and past performance. However, debates can be challenging to organize in developing countries because of fledgeling democratic structures and limited media penetration. IGC researchers in Sierra Leone and Ghana have worked with civil society partners to broadcast debates between parliamentary candidates and explore whether these debates improve voter knowledge and deliberation.
To maximize the value of the debates, the organizers must ensure that the format and moderator are appropriate to the topic and to the voters. Organizers must also establish objective criteria to select the candidates and set the rules of engagement, including time limits and questions.