FREE ESSAY ON PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES

PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES

Presidential Debates
Presidential debates are becoming a large part of a campaign plan. ("Where the voters
are") Who would think that such a short confrontation between the candidates would sway
the vote of so many viewers? A presidential campaign could be won or lost from a single
debate. The candidate must keep their cool and not go over the edge; they must be have a
strong stand point on all of the topics, don't avoid anything. When debates first started
they did not have this much effect on the voters, but now that a debate can be heard over
the internet and through the television voters don't have to put forth any effort. All of
the necessary points are usually covered in the debate. The points are not the only
things that affect a voter, the appearance of the candidate, his tone of voice and his
overall preciseness of his plans and ideas. Though the more modern debates can some what
be planned, debates are still believed to be the best possible way to see the candidate
in action and not just reading or saying what everyone wants to hear. The spin doctors,
sponsors, television and media are playing a much larger part in presidential debates
these days but all of this still shows what the importance of the debate is. 
Spin Doctors
Spin doctors, isn't that a strange name in politics and especially a presidential debate.
No it is not the singing group called the Spin Doctors. In large debates a campaign will
put together what they call a "spin squad", this is a group of several spin doctors.
These people are actually a very vital part of any presidential debate. All of the spin
doctors today are very powerful in the government and also paid a small chunk of money
for going out and preaching their parties' candidate's beliefs and plans. Spin doctors
are the people whom are hired to perform the pre and post debate controversy among the
media. The pre debate spin does not usually have any effect on the media. They are
responsible for "accentuating the positive and eliminating the negative". (Spin doctors)
Which means they are trying to take anything that was good in the debate for the campaign
and basically feed it to the media. They keep doing this until they believe that the
point, which is good, has been gotten across to the media and the media now better
understands what was actually being said. Instead of themselves putting their own opinion
of what happen down they put down what the spin doctors are telling them. When
eliminating the negative the spin doctors are trying to convince the media that what was
actually said came out to be a miss understanding and after that they continue pounding
the positive points. The place that the spin doctors work can sometimes be on the
platform after the debate but is usually held in a large room. This room is complete
chaos, after the debate media member's rush to this place to be the first to interview
the spin doctors. The spin doctors consider this place "Spin Alley", and say it is a
frantic dance between reporters and spin doctors as individual members of the press
search for the unique angle, which no one else has covered. (Spin doctors) A bystander
view said " Spin alley is nuts! But I guess somehow this chaos helps inform the voters of
what really happened in the debate." (Marano 1996) Though the spinners are from the same
party as their presidential candidate, they are never there to push for the party only
the candidate. In the presidential debate of 1996 the debate went really well for
Independent candidate Ross Perot, however the post debate action in spin alley really
hurt him. For everyone one of Perot's spinners the Democrats and Republicans had three to
four spinners. This made it hard for the Perot's spinners to convince the media of his
excellent job and points in the debate. 
Sponsors 
The Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD) is a well-known front group for both the
Democratic and Republican parties; its involvement in corporate America is more obscure.
(Carlin) The Commission on Presidential Debates was established in 1987 to make sure that
debates are a permanent part of every general election. This way the voters would be
getting the best possible opinion of a candidate. Its purpose is to undertake research
and educational activities relating to presidential debates. The organization is a
nonprofit, nonpartisan corporation, which sponsored all of the debates in 1988, 1992, and
1996. ("Commission on Presidential Debates") The Commission on Presidential Debates
released the criteria, which a candidate must receive to be invited, and the magic number
is fifteen percent. Which means that a candidate must be supported by at least fifteen
percent of the voters in five national network polls. The CPD has operated over the years
by collecting millions of dollars from large corporations. In return these corporate
sponsors receive several gifts and benefits such as: free debate tickets, receptions, and
trinkets. But the two biggest benefits that a corporation receives is the ability to have
access and talk to a presidential candidates campaign. This gives the corporation the
ability to talk to the campaign about them providing money and support if they in return
provide sponsorship of the corporation. This is a benefit to both sides one side receives
millions of dollars that are put forth in the campaign for such things as advertising and
paying for spin doctors. The other side then receives nation wide recognition from a high
power and would prove to be beneficial in the future. Really this is a no lose situation.
The second big thing that a corporation receives for providing money to the CPD is
selective exposure to the American public. Not only will the presidential campaign
support the corporation the CPD will as well. There are several examples of this, in 1992
after contributing more than 250,000 thousand dollars in cash and in-kind contributions,
Phillip Morris won the right to hang a large banner during the post debate interviews.
(Raskin 2000) Also Anheuser-Busch, a debate sponsor in 1992 and 1996 had given more than
a million dollars to the Democratic and Republican campaign parties and over 550,000
dollars to the CPD. (Raskin 2000) This earned them the right to be the sole sponsor of
the presidential debate in St. Louis. Phillip Morris also gave more than three million
dollars to the two parties, along with the Bank of America giving thousands of dollars.
(Raskin 2000) It is believed that the Federal Election Commission (FEC) must also be
receiving some kind of sponsor ship or they would have put a stop to these large
contributions. As well as sponsor ship from corporations campaigns also receive money
from cities who are interested in sponsoring a debate. The number of cities that wish to
hold debates has increased drastically, this past year it was forty-five cities. And the
average cost of a debate has not changed from 1988 to present; it is still 500,000
dollars but could easily change with the number of cities increasing and the effect off
debates increase.
Televised Debates and Media
The first televised debate occurred between Kennedy and Nixon in 1960, millions of
Americans tuned their televisions in and watched history in the making. People do not
only see the debate they also hear commentary about the debate. If you are someone who
does not watch debates on the television will definitely read about them in the newspaper
or magazines. Media interpretations follow a pattern. They devote little time to the
content of the debates but much time to the personalities of the candidates and the
process by which they make the decision to debate, prepare to debate, and spin the
stories about expectations for and effects the debate. The media interpretations are
usually in the frame work of a horse race, seeing the debate as a dramatic contest of
real importance to the candidates, and expressing most interest in the question of who
won? They rely a great deal on polls to answer this question. Presidential debates in the
fall are usually fully covered by national networks and viewed by millions. Debates are
specified as individual news events themselves, with much emphasis on where and when they
were held. The presidential debates, like the Sate of the Union message, occupy a place
on the short list of American speeches that qualify as a lead story on network television
news. Televised debate effects are chiefly determined whether they produced a big change
in the campaign. You can also conclude that networks set up a "must win" scenario because
that was the most exciting, the most consistent with their role as entertainment medium,
and would improve ratings the most. The heaviest attention of debates is on the first
one; this shows that a good first impression does count. In our lazy nation today, most
American citizen cast their vote on what they see on the news. It is safe to say that the
media primarily control people's opinion on political issues. Unfortunately the words
most developed nation don't have time to carefully pick their leaders in any level,
especially the presidential race. While vast amounts of information is available to the
American citizen to carefully pick their candidates, they chose to use what the see in
the debates and what the media turns into their own opinion. There are times when the
media gets carried away with information; they allow their own opinion to drive them. I
have found ten points that you must consider when watching a debate: First, listen to the
moderator explaining the format at the outset of the debate. Two who is the debate
sponsor? Third who is on the stage and who isn't; what criteria were used to select
participating candidates. Fourth who asks the questions? Is there a single moderator or a
panel? Fifth is there a live audience and, if so, who is it? Sixth is the subject matter
confined to one area? Seventh what is the time limit, if any? Eighth is the unobtrusive
or does it distract? Ninth at the end of the debate, before the commentators tell you
what happened, write down your impressions? The tenth and final point see how the media
cover the debate. 
The Importance of Presidential Debates
Debates are driving news coverage of the 2000 campaign. Perhaps the biggest event of the
fall campaign is the series of nationally televised presidential debates. While there is
no requirement that the presidential candidates meet in debates, it is almost impossible
not to participate. If a candidate wouldn't he would be looked at blocking them for some
unknown reason or they are scared of something. We seem to be having more primary-state
debates than ever before. The first televised pre-New Hampshire primary debate aired in
1976, that number grew to six in 1988, the last time neither party had an incumbent
running for president. In 1992 there was three Democratic debates, in 1996 there were
three Republican debates and this year there is a huge increase to a total of sixteen
before the New Hampshire primary, this is one example that shows how debates are
increasing. Are debates becoming too much of the voters opinion? You would think so but
voters seem to prefer debates to advertisements. Al Gore decided to base his whole
campaign on debates he challenged Bill Bradley to a no advertisement, only debate
contest. Which would mean they would compete in debates twice a week. The campaigns have
the final word in debates. Although the campaign sets the terms, there are other
interested parties. How meaningful a debate is depends on the public and the negotiations
arrived to by the campaigns. A debate can reveal the candidates' positions and their
differences, or it can devolve into a huge televised press conference. Debates are high-
stakes events. Especially to third party candidates. Voters who have not yet made up
their mind can be won or lost depending on what happens in the debate. The drama of
direct confrontation attracts a huge television audience. The viewing of the debate
ranges from 85 to 97 million people and is increasing every year. You also need to show
that you are a nationally viable candidate by getting into the debates. Debates are
crucial because they keep our campaigns from being about nothing but money. No matter how
much money a candidate has he can never win a debate, even if he buys the best spin
doctors. 
Conclusion
In conclusion I believe that presidential debates play a vital role in shaping the
opinion of the voters. In addition, candidates can use the debates as a form to present
their plans and visions for the nation. I also believe that if a candidate does not do
well in a debate, then he probably won't fair very well in the final election results.
Debates have become the primary source to the voter's opinion on a candidate. 
Bibliography
Work Cited:
"Where the voters are." U.S. News and World Report
September 23, 1996: 1. Infotrac. Online. Gayle Group. 
April 15, 2000
Schneider, William. "And They're Better Than Many NBA 
Games." National Journal January 15, 2000: 11. Infotrac. Online. Gayle Group. April 15,
2000
Carlin, Diana. "Presidential debates as focal points for 
campaign arguments." Political Communication December 1992: 4. Infotrac. Online. Gayle
Group. April 15, 2000 
"Commission on Presidential Debates" 2000. Election 2000 
Debates Online. 15 April 2000. 
"Vote America" 2000. The Debates. 15 April 2000. 
Kenadall, Kelly. "Presidential Debates Through Media Eyes." 
American Behavioral Scientist August 1997: 5. Infotrac. Online. Gayle Group. April 15,
2000
Morano, Marc. "Manipulating the voters from inside spin 
alley." Insight on the News November 4, 1996: 1. Infotrac. Online. Gayle Group. April 15,
2000
"Spin Doctors" 1996. 15 April 2000.