When Jon Stewart went on the show Crossfire in 2004, he went with a mission. He was there to declare his point of view about the show and its practices, and he was there to engage the show’s hosts in a debate about the ethics of their actions. He came prepared to argue, but, unfortunately for Stewart, it is impossible to argue when neither party is actually willing to do so. The hosts were unrelenting in their efforts to crack jokes about Stewart, derail him, and ask their own questions, and Stewart himself simply stuck to one point – that he was a comedian – and would receive no criticism of himself or his practices. In the end, Stewart’s appearance on the show was simply a demonstration of exactly what he wanted to discuss: the fact that televised “debates” hosted by Crossfire were nothing more than two factions firmly sticking to their guns, ignoring the other side’s opinions, and reverting to almost-screamed commonplaces.
One of the best examples of this theatrical argument was the presidential debates of 2012. Though the debates were hosted by very serious news anchors and dealt with significant topics, the debates invariably devolved into a competition of which candidate had better buzzwords, ranging from “small business” to “lower tax rate” to “immigration reform”. These phrases, just like the debates themselves, contained almost no substance. Similar to the debates hosted on Crossfire, they were just a production meant to dazzle and impress the voters.
So if we’re surrounded by all these displays of fake rhetoric masquerading as real debate, how can we tell which is which? Discerning the difference between substantive debates and those meant for entertainment can be very difficult, but one of the best ways to do so is to evaluate if the opposing parties are responding to their opponent or not. In showy debates, what matters is hammering the viewers with your opinion over and over again, no matter what the person across the table is actually saying. In a real debate, the parties are forced to listen to each other, acknowledge the other side’s opinion, and respond to it in turn with their perspective. It is by no means a perfect method, but paying attention to whether or not the debaters themselves are paying attention is vital to determining the quality of a debate.