The American Democracy Project at Work: Engaging Citizens in Argumentation

Campaign debates long have been a part of the American political landscape. Whether in the form of the famous Lincoln-Douglas debates or more recent versions, Americans have come to expect political candidates to participate in this campaign ritual. The 2004 presidential campaign was no exception. After protracted negotiations, President George W. Bush and Senator John Kerry agreed to three presidential debates and one vice-presidential debate between Vice-President Dick Cheney and Senator John Edwards ("Bush, Kerry," 2004). Within the academic community, researchers have investigated political campaign debates from a wide range of perspectives. Studies have examined debate formats, participants, rhetorical strategies, presentation styles, media coverage, and the diffusion of media coverage, among other topics (Benoit, Pier, Brazeal, McHale, Klyukovski, & Airne, 2001; Jones, 2005; Racine Group, 2002). This research notwithstanding, scholars agree that more is necessary, particularly in light of the diverse sources of political information available in today's multi-window, mobile information environment. One important avenue of research strives to assess political debates by capturing the reactions of communities that include new voters. In 1992, the National Communication Association and the Commission on Presidential Debates established DebateWatch, a project that brings community members together to view campaign debates and then to discuss the issues in small groups. Data collected via standardized surveys provided by DebateWatch organizers provides additional insight into viewer reactions to televised debates. Previous DebateWatch transcripts have been used to "identify what voters learn from debates, what formats are preferred, how citizens disagree, how men and women as well as young and older voters differ in their political talk, how voters express political alienation, and how debates compare to other information sources as voter education tools" (Carlin, Schill, Levasseur, & King, 2005, p. 621). This project has two goals. First, it presents the findings from a 2004 DebateWatch event in order to investigate the following research questions. RQ1: Do viewers value the DebateWatch discussions? RQ2: Does viewing a campaign debate influence viewers' understanding of the candidates? RQ3: Do viewing a debate and participating in discussion have an impact on voting intentions? Second, this project recommends ways that argumentation scholars can utilize the dialogue about campaign debates both to engage their communities in the civic process and to increase public understanding of argumentation and debate. REVIEW OF LITERATURE The three primary areas of the campaign debate literature are: first, whether campaign debates meet, or can meet, the definition of debate', second, the influence of debates on voters' attitudes and behaviors; and third, the role of debates in the larger democratic process. (1) Are contemporary political debates true "debates," in the sense understood by argumentation scholars? In 1962, J. Jeffrey Auer identified five elements of debates: confrontation; equal and adequate time; equally matched contestants; a stated proposition; and a goal of gaining an audience decision (p. 146). Because they failed to include each of these elements, Auer argued that the 1960 Kennedy-Nixon debates were in fact "counterfeit debates." Many scholars agreed, suggesting that these events were more akin to "joint press conferences" (Trent & Friedenburg, 2004, p. 267) than to genuine debates. Over time, however, some scholars have come to believe that even though they differ from the traditional debate format, political debates can be evaluated according to argumentation criteria, including: claims presented, use of evidence, and refutation of opponent's claims (Carlin, 1989; Carlin & McKinney, 1994; Hollihan & Riley, 1981). Research also has examined political debates' contribution to voters' understanding of campaign issues. …