Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Drjohnrock
Not exactly sure what you're referring to--televised US presidential debates? I didn't say "since 1960" because even though that was the first one, there was a sixteen year gap until they became a permanent part of the landscape in 1976. And I've seen taped portions of the 1960 debate--Kennedy and Nixon acted more or less like adults. I didn't think Nixon had it in him.
If you mean US presidential debates in general, I think Lincoln's debates were of a much higher quality than the ones on television.
As for debates in general, a proper debate, where one side supports a premise and the other attacks it, can be very enlightening and bears no relationship to Andre The Giant threatening Hulk Hogan.
|
Referring to debates in general, they always have just been an excuse and opportunity to create press releases and press copy for mass distribution, basically fodder for journalists and editors.. sure the television aspect changed the dynamics from just what is said to how it is delivered including things like tone of voice and body language BUT in the 21st century there is so much saturation coverage on TV and visual media that again now even TV debates are no longer necessary or functional.
The Lincoln-Douglass debates a perfect example of how the debate format is just a 19th century publicity stunt, transcripts and excerpts from this dominated the media coverage of the election of 1860, indeed Lincoln himself had it published as a book in time for the Election.