Debatewatch

DebateWatch is a voter education project of the Commission on Presidential Debates (see http://www.debates.org) that encourages citizens to view debates in groups and discuss what they learn after each of the debates. DebateWatch grew out of research conducted by communication scholars in 1992. In the course of conducting 60 focus groups in 18 cities to learn how debates function as voter education tools, how they compare to other political communication channels, what formats are most informative, and how citizens talk about politics, researchers discovered that most participants had not carried on extended political discussions with individuals outside of family. Many participants found the discussions to be as educational as the debates themselves and suggested that the focus group project be continued in future elections.

Through a grant from the Ford Foundation in 1996, Diana Carlin, the team leader of the 1992 study, developed DebateWatch '96. The project included publication of a packet that explained the concept, how to organize a group, questions to ask, and how to provide feedback about the usefulness of topics discussed to the Commission. Through a network of 125 partner organizations, media stories, public service announcements, and information on the Commission's Web site, individuals requested DebateWatch packets. Results of answers to three key questions were sent to the DebateWatch headquarters where they were compiled and released to the media. The questions were: which issues were most useful to you as a voter, which were least useful, and what topics do you want discussed in future debates or in the campaign? Thousands of individuals' viewpoints were represented by facilitator reports. More than 100 research groups were conducted by members of the National Communication Association that provided additional information about sources of political information, the impact of the debates on voter choice, and the value of DebateWatch as a political education tool. DebateWatch was continued in 2000 and 2004. With the extended use of the Web and e-mail, all instructions and forms were provided only on the Web, and results were returned via e-mail or directly online. The Commission released results on its Web site after each debate.

Key findings from DebateWatch were published in journals, books, and conference papers. Findings included the following: (a) Viewers prefer multiple formats, with the panelist format preferred by the least number of respondents; (b) participants in the town hall format are viewed as surrogates who ask questions that resonate with voters; (c) follow-up questions are considered key to making the candidates responsive to questions; (d) viewers consider a candidate's record in office as the best indicator of character because it reveals priorities, willingness to compromise, and ability to deliver on promises; (e) viewers prefer [Page 166]questions and formats that make comparisons and contrasts clear; (f) participants wanted fewer topics per debate and different topics in each debate; (g) debates were considered a far better way to learn about the candidates than other information sources; (h) all participants learned something new from the debates, but those who had not followed the campaign until prior to the debates learned the most; (i) the debates served to reinforce previous voter choices rather than change candidate preference for nearly all who came into the debates with a preference; however, high percentages of undecided voters did indicate movement toward a candidate—the percentages varied by year; and (j) participants indicated that as a result of participating in DebateWatch they were more likely to seek out additional information about the candidates.

...