Tips on moderating a political debate
October 14, 2015 12:09 PM Subscribe
I will be moderating a political debate for a local election. I've never done this before. Any advice? I don't have any input into the structure of the debate. The questions will be pre-written (not by me) and there is no audience Q&A. But I'd appreciate tips on things like how to begin and wrap up, how to enforce time limits, and anything else I should be thinking about.
Best answer: If something heated or interesting comes up you should make sure to give the candidate who was not initially asked the chance to respond.
Also alternate between who gets to answer questions first.
posted by brookeb at 12:27 PM on October 14, 2015
Also alternate between who gets to answer questions first.
posted by brookeb at 12:27 PM on October 14, 2015
Watching the debate last night, I wondered if mics could be set to automatically turn off on a timer. That might be too complicated for you, but seems like it would help. When the sound switched off, if they try to keep talking, it would be easier to talk over them.
posted by three_red_balloons at 1:01 PM on October 14, 2015
posted by three_red_balloons at 1:01 PM on October 14, 2015
If people are likely to get snippy, review the decorum rules in Robert's Rules of Order to get a sense of what to tell them to stop doing. There are also some rules for "the assembly" to follow that give you a sense of what the audience should not do.
posted by SMPA at 1:43 PM on October 14, 2015
posted by SMPA at 1:43 PM on October 14, 2015
Best answer: The biggest thing is to be nearly invisible. As has already been said, your introduction is cut and dried "I'm chickenmagazine, with the Amalgamated Chicken Farmers of Chicken County, and welcome to the debate; here are the rules..."
I WOULD state the rules, at least at a simplistic level (time limits, what chances there are to respond, etc.). This way if a candidate or their supports acts up about being interrupted, not getting another chance to respond, etc. people know in advance why that is so.
There are some debate rules out there you can crib, surely. Usually ALL candidates get a chance to answer each question (candidates should rotate and/or be random in going first, second, etc.), and a fixed number of responses they can make in response to what others have said. Yes, candidate C may throw in a zinger aimed at candidate A after all chances to respond have been exhausted, but there should be a wrap-up statement available to each candidate (again in random order), and that's their chance if it's that important. You will not be able to exhaust important and/or complex disagreements in a fixed amount of time.
And the biggest way you can succeed or fail is in how well you enforce those rules, absolutely impartially. It's not really your job to make sure a given topic is thoroughly explored, and in fact some issue may well come up that seems to grab everyone's attention and kind of galvanize everyone - and yet you need to keep moving. Stick to the original template, absolutely.
Most local political debates I've ever seen, the candidates are usually fairly polite (everyone still has to live in this town when it's over). They WILL try to talk too long - automatic cutoff may be difficult, but if you can get someone to run a sound board (and the timer), and slide the speaker's microphone gain down as soon as they're out... the best system for warning is a yellow card or light - show it when they have a good 25% of their time left to give everyone a chance to wind up gracefully (if they will). So for a 3 minute talk - 45 second warning. Then red means stop and they're done instantly at that. Jump in right on top of them and keep moving!
You may not be able to moderate, i.e. have any influence over, what questions are asked, but if at all possible, for the love of all that is holy keep them from being too repetitive. I've been to debates where it seemed every question was a variation on One Big Topic (like - the budget) and/or the candidates all managed to give the same answer over and over (some candidates turn every question into another spin on their one Big Thing in the platform - you can't control that, and it only hurts them).
posted by randomkeystrike at 1:47 PM on October 14, 2015
I WOULD state the rules, at least at a simplistic level (time limits, what chances there are to respond, etc.). This way if a candidate or their supports acts up about being interrupted, not getting another chance to respond, etc. people know in advance why that is so.
There are some debate rules out there you can crib, surely. Usually ALL candidates get a chance to answer each question (candidates should rotate and/or be random in going first, second, etc.), and a fixed number of responses they can make in response to what others have said. Yes, candidate C may throw in a zinger aimed at candidate A after all chances to respond have been exhausted, but there should be a wrap-up statement available to each candidate (again in random order), and that's their chance if it's that important. You will not be able to exhaust important and/or complex disagreements in a fixed amount of time.
And the biggest way you can succeed or fail is in how well you enforce those rules, absolutely impartially. It's not really your job to make sure a given topic is thoroughly explored, and in fact some issue may well come up that seems to grab everyone's attention and kind of galvanize everyone - and yet you need to keep moving. Stick to the original template, absolutely.
Most local political debates I've ever seen, the candidates are usually fairly polite (everyone still has to live in this town when it's over). They WILL try to talk too long - automatic cutoff may be difficult, but if you can get someone to run a sound board (and the timer), and slide the speaker's microphone gain down as soon as they're out... the best system for warning is a yellow card or light - show it when they have a good 25% of their time left to give everyone a chance to wind up gracefully (if they will). So for a 3 minute talk - 45 second warning. Then red means stop and they're done instantly at that. Jump in right on top of them and keep moving!
You may not be able to moderate, i.e. have any influence over, what questions are asked, but if at all possible, for the love of all that is holy keep them from being too repetitive. I've been to debates where it seemed every question was a variation on One Big Topic (like - the budget) and/or the candidates all managed to give the same answer over and over (some candidates turn every question into another spin on their one Big Thing in the platform - you can't control that, and it only hurts them).
posted by randomkeystrike at 1:47 PM on October 14, 2015
Even if you're not in control of the questions, perhaps you can at least organize them in a semi-coherent way? For me, debates are hard to follow when they become a grabbag of random topics. Separating them out into broad themes ("big issue" topics, the budget, roads, the sewage treatment plant, the tire fire that's been burning for 40 years, etc...) can help keep things more organized.
posted by zachlipton at 8:00 PM on October 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by zachlipton at 8:00 PM on October 14, 2015 [1 favorite]
Best answer: The audience might appreciate it if you not only explained the rules (so they understood that you were not arbitrarily interrupting a speaker), but also that you didn't come up with the questions, and ideally where they came from.
"These questions were selected by the editorial staff of local_paper, many of which were sent in by you, the public."
One thing I've found with debates is that people appreciate transparency. If you don't tell people the questions are someone elses, they will blame you for them (even if they are good questions, some people will be annoyed by some of them).
...
I like the suggestion of organizing the questions so that they have some coherency to them.
...
If you can have a single monitor facing both the participants with a timer running on it, it will help them pace their answers. You should have someone that's running this rig though (ie: don't try to take on this duty yourself). If you do something like this, you should prep with the person and do a short dry run - it sucks to have technical difficulties distract from the content.
posted by el io at 2:36 PM on October 16, 2015
"These questions were selected by the editorial staff of local_paper, many of which were sent in by you, the public."
One thing I've found with debates is that people appreciate transparency. If you don't tell people the questions are someone elses, they will blame you for them (even if they are good questions, some people will be annoyed by some of them).
...
I like the suggestion of organizing the questions so that they have some coherency to them.
...
If you can have a single monitor facing both the participants with a timer running on it, it will help them pace their answers. You should have someone that's running this rig though (ie: don't try to take on this duty yourself). If you do something like this, you should prep with the person and do a short dry run - it sucks to have technical difficulties distract from the content.
posted by el io at 2:36 PM on October 16, 2015
Response by poster: Thanks for the advice! I moderated the debate and it was a lot of fun. In case people come here in the future looking for advice (helloooo People of the Future!) here are a few more tips based on my (one) experience:
- Show up early to meet the candidates and make sure you know how to pronounce their names, and to get settled and do a sound check.
- Dress in something that will look good and feel comfortable when you're sitting down. Focus on how you look from the waist up, but keep in mind that if you're sitting at a table, people may be able to see under it. (This advice is more for skirt-wearers.)
- Bring a water bottle in case they don't have any at the debate.
- Have the timing person in a place where you and all the candidates can easily see them.
- Warn candidates in your intro that you'll be cutting them off when their time is up. We gave a 10 second warning and in my intro, I asked the candidates to wrap up when they saw that because I was going to be strict about timing.
- For each question, write down who you started with, and have a list of all the candidates so you can go down the list and make sure you got everybody in the right order.
- When I was feeling nervous, it helped me to remind myself that nobody was there to see me or hear what I had to say, my only job was to keep things moving in a way that felt fair and respectful.
posted by chickenmagazine at 5:20 PM on October 19, 2015
- Show up early to meet the candidates and make sure you know how to pronounce their names, and to get settled and do a sound check.
- Dress in something that will look good and feel comfortable when you're sitting down. Focus on how you look from the waist up, but keep in mind that if you're sitting at a table, people may be able to see under it. (This advice is more for skirt-wearers.)
- Bring a water bottle in case they don't have any at the debate.
- Have the timing person in a place where you and all the candidates can easily see them.
- Warn candidates in your intro that you'll be cutting them off when their time is up. We gave a 10 second warning and in my intro, I asked the candidates to wrap up when they saw that because I was going to be strict about timing.
- For each question, write down who you started with, and have a list of all the candidates so you can go down the list and make sure you got everybody in the right order.
- When I was feeling nervous, it helped me to remind myself that nobody was there to see me or hear what I had to say, my only job was to keep things moving in a way that felt fair and respectful.
posted by chickenmagazine at 5:20 PM on October 19, 2015
« Older Former supervisor sharing personal info with... | It was like "The Something, Something, Something... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
Otherwise, keep your intro and wrap up very brief. No one is there to hear you, so the less you say the better. Introduce yourself, thank the candidates, thank the hosting org.
If the debate is just a series of questions with a set response time for each candidate, your job is pretty easy. If there is unstructured back and forth, then moderation is more of an art form. This type of debate is much better though.
posted by ssg at 12:25 PM on October 14, 2015 [1 favorite]