Analysis & Opinions - The Huffington Post
Televised Debates are Bad for Democracy
There seems to be a consensus that the UK's first televised debates that everyone was so excited about were good for our democracy. I would hesitate before making such a hasty judgment.
I concede that they got people talking about the election — although that was always likely to happen in an election which resulted in a hung parliament where no party had a clear majority. It's also certainly true that voter registration was up, turnout was also slightly up, and these developments are not to be sniffed at. But I really wonder whether these aren't short-term gains at the expense of long-term damage. Most of the arguments in their favor have a whiff of the 'all publicity is good publicity' about them.
Firstly, there is the damage they did to the rest of the campaign. They had rendered it a sideshow. The agenda for the whole of the rest of the parties' campaigning was subsequently led by the debates...."
Continue reading: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/azeem-ibrahim/televised-debates-are-bad_b_581785.html
Want to Read More?
The full text of this publication is available via the original publication source.
For more information on this publication:
Belfer Communications Office
For Academic Citation:
Ibrahim, Azeem.“Televised Debates are Bad for Democracy.” The Huffington Post, June 11, 2010.
- Recommended
- In the Spotlight
- Most Viewed
Recommended
Audio
- Radio Open Source
JFK in the American Century
Analysis & Opinions
- Foreign Policy
The Realist Case for the Non-Realist Biden
Newspaper Article
- Harvard Crimson
HKS Prof. Aldy Talks Clean Energy, Economic Policy at Belfer Center Webinar
In the Spotlight
Most Viewed
Policy Brief
- Quarterly Journal: International Security
The Future of U.S. Nuclear Policy: The Case for No First Use
Discussion Paper
- Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
Why the United States Should Spread Democracy
There seems to be a consensus that the UK's first televised debates that everyone was so excited about were good for our democracy. I would hesitate before making such a hasty judgment.
I concede that they got people talking about the election — although that was always likely to happen in an election which resulted in a hung parliament where no party had a clear majority. It's also certainly true that voter registration was up, turnout was also slightly up, and these developments are not to be sniffed at. But I really wonder whether these aren't short-term gains at the expense of long-term damage. Most of the arguments in their favor have a whiff of the 'all publicity is good publicity' about them.
Firstly, there is the damage they did to the rest of the campaign. They had rendered it a sideshow. The agenda for the whole of the rest of the parties' campaigning was subsequently led by the debates...."
Continue reading: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/azeem-ibrahim/televised-debates-are-bad_b_581785.html
Want to Read More?
The full text of this publication is available via the original publication source.- Recommended
- In the Spotlight
- Most Viewed
Recommended
Audio - Radio Open Source
JFK in the American Century
Analysis & Opinions - Foreign Policy
The Realist Case for the Non-Realist Biden
Newspaper Article - Harvard Crimson
HKS Prof. Aldy Talks Clean Energy, Economic Policy at Belfer Center Webinar
In the Spotlight
Most Viewed
Policy Brief - Quarterly Journal: International Security
The Future of U.S. Nuclear Policy: The Case for No First Use
Discussion Paper - Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
Why the United States Should Spread Democracy


