TV Town Halls a Waste of Time?

CNN logo

CNN logo
In defending his network’s recently televised town hall with Donald Trump, CNN CEO Chris Licht said that the event made “a lot of news.” Unfortunately, the big news about CNN’s town hall is that it was an unmitigated disaster. Moderator Kaitlin Collins, a seasoned Washington correspondent, did the best she could to fact-check Trump’s rapid-fire lies in real-time, but her facts didn’t resonate with the live audience for two reasons. First, no matter what she tried to interject, Trump talked over her. Second, CNN stupidly only let Trump supporters sit in the auditorium, and those MAGA-heads didn’t want facts to get in the way of their beliefs. The CNN Town Hall thus devolved into a political rally for Trump which only served to entertain and energize his base. It was also a far cry from the town halls and debates which our nation had come to expect for most of our history.

According to Smithsonian magazine, America’s first town hall took place in 1633 in Dorchester, Massachusetts, and then every Monday morning thereafter. Those town meetings were held to settle and establish, “such orders as may tend to the general good as aforesaid.” The decisions made became law and, “every man to be bound thereby, without gaynesaying or resistance.” As Smithsonian columnist Jackie Mansky noted in her 2016 article, the Dorchester model spread to other New England communities, serving as a regular “majority-rules” forum in which citizens decided on important issues of the day. Those town halls eventually evolved into our modern-day city council and county commissioners’ meetings.

Televised town hall meetings in which political candidates answer questions from an audience are a relatively new concept. They were pioneered by, believe it or not, a once-failed Presidential candidate and a future FOX News CEO. In 1968 former Vice President Richard Nixon, who was the Republican nominee for President that year, teamed with Roger Ailes to produce and broadcast a series of live town hall events titled “Man in the Arena.” Unlike his 1960 debates with John Kennedy in which Nixon came off looking pale and nervous, the 1968 town halls were staged just for the GOP nominee. In later years, other candidates like Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton used televised town halls to promote their candidacies and enhance their public image.

Over the past few years, CNN has become known for its town halls, some which focus on issues in the news, and others that feature declared presidential candidates. It was the latter that went awry earlier this month when Donald Trump was given a national forum in which he continued to deny that Joe Biden had won in 2020 and said that the MAGA insurrectionists were fine people. He also used the town hall to berate and defame E. Jean Carroll just one day after having been found guilty of sexually abusing and defaming her. The question now is, “How can televised town halls and debates be improved?”

Veteran CNN correspondent Christine Amanpour, knowing Donald Trump’s propensity for being Donald Trump, warned Chris Licht ahead of time not to go through with the town hall, and certainly not to broadcast the event live. Her suggestion to tape the town hall and have the ability to edit out egregious and defamatory statements prior to broadcast is a valid point. After all, why have a live broadcast if you’re not taking live, call-in questions?  

So, let’s talk about the live audience. If the host network wants to broadcast a town hall, then it should be incumbent upon that network to invite an equal number of audience members from each major political party so to ensure that a balanced mix of questions will be asked of the guest. In the case of a general election debate, the same standard should hold true, even though questions would only come from a moderator. When broadcasting a primary debate, the audience should be comprised of an equal number of supporters for each candidate. Beyond that, live audiences must be instructed in advance not to applaud except when the moderator cues a commercial break. Other forms of demonstration or protest would not be allowed at any time. Controlling the composition and deportment of the live audience will preclude the event from becoming a political rally for any candidate.

Next, I’d like to suggest some reforms for the candidates themselves. For town halls, the candidate must observe common courtesies toward the moderator or, in the case of a debate, toward the other candidates. This means no one is allowed to interrupt or talk over anyone else. It also means that no candidate can resort to name-calling or making a false statement. Moreover, debate participants would not be allowed to run past their allotted time to speak, and, in the case of a town hall, the candidate would not be allowed to keep repeating himself or veering off into a topic not related to the question. If any candidate violates any of these rules, a buzzer would sound, and the offending candidate will be warned. If he is buzzed for a second time, he will be removed from the debate stage and the broadcast will continue with the remaining candidates. If, during a town hall, a candidate is buzzed for the third time, the broadcast will end. 

The goal of televised town halls and debates should be to inform and educate the audience, and to let them learn about public policy initiatives, and about the candidates who are discussing their views on important issues of the day. If it takes a tape delay, new rules, or a buzzer to accomplish that goal, then so be it.

 
 

facebook marketing