How to reform the American political debate

The second showdown was a new low. Here are several ideas to improve the format

Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton face off in St. Louis, Missouri. Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg

Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton met on Sunday night in St Louis after a wild week. Reeling from the fallout over lewd comments he made in 2005 that resulted in many Republican leaders abandoning him, Mr Trump entered the debate in a battered state. Mrs Clinton was in a similarly fragile state after WikiLeaks released thousands of emails that detail what she said in private to Wall Street firms, a subject that was deeply contested during the primaries.

With the stage set, the candidates bitterly traded personal attacks for 90 uncomfortable minutes. The hostility began straight away as both candidates refused to shake hands. Commentators have called the debate, which lacked substance on matters of policy, one of the worst in American history. With one debate left before voters head to the polls on November 8, it is clear from this side of the world that it is time to consider ways of reforming the debate itself so that voters can get a serious idea of the policy positions of the candidates and not simply watch a collection of personal attacks.

Kathleen Hall Jamison, the director of the Annenberg School for Communication in Los Angeles, is the head of a bipartisan working group trying to reform the debate. Among their suggestions is the removal of live audiences. They claim that applause from the audience has the power to sway viewers at home and encourage candidates such as Donald Trump to increase outlandish statements.

More importantly, the Annenberg working group argues that debate moderation should be taken away from the hands of the media. For several decades, debate moderators have been members of the mainstream broadcast and print media. The issue they have identified is that the media has certain ideas about what the public should know about the candidates. Moderators should be more diverse and include retired judges, university presidents and historians. Not only will these types of people ask different questions but they think differently about what the electorate should know about the candidates.

Given the lack of substance in the last presidential debate, reform is long overdue. Once this election is decided there will be many difficult issues that the American people will have to confront, from women’s rights to tax evasion. Reforming the presidential debate should be one of the easy challenges to solve that will have a great effect on America’s next election.