It happened. The debate we have all been waiting for. As Republican Moderator, Lester Holt, introduced the 2016 presidential nominees, they confidently walked onto the stage and shook hands. Donald Trump’s neat blue tie and Hillary Clinton’s powerful red suit exhibited an aesthetic sense of patriotism from left to right.
The tone quickly shifted as the debate began. The candidates were allowed two minutes to answer questions, with designated response time upon reference. There were several instances when Holt had asked questions of narrow focus, but answers were broad and off topic.
Holt’s loss of control was apparent as Trump routinely interrupted Clinton’s responses, which on several occasions resulted in petty quarrel between the two. Laughter and cheers continued to escape the audience with minimal repercussion.
Holt’s performance was quickly under fire on social media.
Ghost of Moderator’s Past
Holt is not the only moderator who has fallen under scrutiny after leading a presidential debate. In the GOP debate last October, CNBC was criticized for the lack of prepared material when responding to candidates. Moderation criticism has been common during this year’s primary election debates. Some of the concerns were the moderators going easy on candidates, providing unequal response time and personal attacks.
New Media
Modern debates have become televised in a way that resembles entertainment television, rather than simply allowing opponents to define political strategies. Traditionally debate topics were expanded ideas that had not been made apparent through the course of their campaigns, but now content is often redundant and combative. This style of debate skews the purpose of traditional media and challenges reporters to adjust their moderation techniques.