Dueling town halls are not debates, and American voters lose if this becomes the norm

On Thursday, for the first time in American history, we saw what happens when a presidential debate is scrapped. In place of what should have been the joint town hall debate of 2020, dueling town halls forced voters to pick which candidate they would rather watch.

Devoid of any chance of imminent rebuttal — the vital element of debates that allows candidates to respond directly to each other’s statements and attacks — these dueling town halls instead forced viewers into the same political echo chambers that greet them on Facebook, Twitter and the rest of social media. In an era of ever-growing political polarization, this is unconscionable.

And while there is no doubt that the decision to air the town halls at the same time plays into President Donald Trump’s desire to “beat” Joe Biden in TV ratings — the same urge that produced “alternative facts” and dubious boasts about the crowd size of Trump’s inauguration — much of the blame for this disaster should be placed on NBC. The network knowingly leveraged Trump’s reality television persona (itself created by NBC with “The Apprentice”) to produce another ratings-grabbing reality television event.

For NBC, this might be no different from putting Sunday Night Football up against Game 6 of the NBA Finals on ABC. But for millions of voters, the decision to turn one of television’s quintessential public services and a sacred democratic tradition into a petty competition between networks was a grave betrayal. Research shows that debates — and even town halls — can be influential for voters seeking to learn more about the candidates’ positions on a variety of issues. Presidential town hall debate viewers also report less cynicism afterward, an especially important benefit during an election as contentious and highly charged as this one.

Unfortunately, as incredible as the idea of simultaneous town halls may be, it is not entirely surprising that something like this would happen during the 2020 election cycle. With the candidates, especially Trump, and their supporters demonstrating increasingly divisive rhetoric and behavior, the presidential race has begun to resemble a reality television spectacle. In the first presidential debate between Trump and Biden, moderator Chris Wallace struggled to contain shouting matches and interruptions — most of them instigated by Trump. But while viewers were deprived of an informative discussion on policy, the debate was a huge TV ratings success as more than 73 million people tuned in, making it the third most watched debate in the history of presidential debates.

Now, by pitting Trump’s town hall directly against Biden’s, NBC was counting on the same dynamic. Trump, with his outrageous behavior and knack for “Apprentice”-style jabs at his enemies, would once again get to talk over Biden, this time by drawing viewers away from ABC with the promise of reality TV entertainment. However, early reports suggest that Biden may have held his own at the very least, if not outright defeated Trump in the battle of the ratings.

But regardless of whoever “won” the ratings, this dueling format sets a dangerous precedent: Why should Trump engage in a debate with Biden if he can speak to voters by himself on prime time television, comfortable knowing his microphone won’t be muted to prevent his constant interruptions? Will future candidates with reality TV personas also spurn debates?

We cannot let Thursday’s embarrassment become a model for the future. If we remove the dialogue between the candidates, opting instead for dueling town halls that amount to nationally televised campaign rallies, then an already polarized electorate could well become splintered beyond repair. We all need breaks from our echo chambers, from the partisan drumbeat of dubious claims and personal attacks. As an unparalleled opportunity to see the candidates put each other to the test on the issues that matter to voters, presidential debates are one of the foundations of modern democracy, and they must be preserved.

Mitchell S. McKinney is a professor of political communication and the director of the Political Communication Institute at the University of Missouri.

This story was originally published October 16, 2020 at 3:23 PM with the headline "Dueling town halls are not debates, and American voters lose if this becomes the norm."