Moderating a live debate is a lot like editing, because moderators have the power to shape the event's tone and direction, and like any print/online editor, they have to choose how much of his or her voice to insert into the story.
Major mayoral candidates Judy Wasylycia-Leis and incumbent Sam Katz sounded off in a CJOB-run debate at RRC's Princess Campus this morning. CJOB's Richard Cloutier was moderating and broadcasting live, as over a hundred students sat in the audience.
A moderator is in charge of asking and soliciting questions, keeping the candidates in line and within the time limit, and generally directing the flow of the debate.
Should they be able to do so in a fair and balanced manner? I think so.
There were a few things that irked me about the moderation in today's debate. First off, I know Judy's a bit wordy, but Cloutier seemed needlessly harsh in cutting her off, sometimes at seemingly strategic moments, and did not seem to do so to Katz in the same way.
The tone of some of his questions were also... interesting. For example, during a debate about rapid transit, Cloutier interjected to poll the audience: who here wants Light Rail Transit, vs. Bus Rapid Transit? Clearly the former got the most cheers, but anyone with any understanding of Katz's political stalling and backpeddling on this issue will immediately realize how flawed this question is. That's why Judy immediately responded with another question to the audience: who wants A rapid transit system, as opposed to none at all? That got the most cheers.
This question in particular highlights the power a moderator of a live debate has and the importance of the choice how to use it. It's also important to consider how this debate came off to the audience listening over the radio, as opposed to for those of us there in person. I prefer a moderator that can hold off on interjecting their own personal opinion into the proceedings. But that's just me.
/for editing class
Interesting observations!
ReplyDelete