Paul Saproza

Televised debates have become essential features of elections worldwide. Given the exceptional visibility and influence of televised electoral discussions, it is worth examining what formats best serve democratic deliberation. To do so, I map the advantages and disadvantages of televised electoral debates according to the most basic ideals of deliberative democracy. I determine that televised electoral debates serve two functions: an epistemic and a social one. From this analysis, I make the case for an alternative two-phase format called “progress talks” that mitigates the epistemic and social drawbacks of conventional televised electoral discussions and enhances overall benefits.