No spontaneity in debates

Nothing, and we mean nothing has been left to chance in this year's presidential debates, the first of which will air today at 7 p.m. MST from the University of Miami in Coral Gables, Fla.

The Commission on Presidential Debates, in a 32-page agreement with the Bush and Kerry campaigns, established rules for practically everything for the three meetings, as well as for the scheduled face-off between the vice presidential candidates.

Everything from the temperature of the hall ("an appropriate temperature according to industry standards," whatever that means) to what kind of paper can be used to take notes has been written into the agreement.

Considering the high-stakes nature of these debates, it's understandable that the candidates want to establish a forum wherein neither will be surprised or unnecessarily intimidated. But while these parameters might help protect the candidates from an inadvertent slip of the tongue, it's questionable whether they will help the electorate understand the candidates' respective stands on critical issues.

Nevertheless, all Americans should tune in tonight to see how President Bush and John Kerry perform in an idiom where there is no rolling back the tape (which the candidates no doubt would have negotiated into the agreement, if only they could).

While the intensely scripted nature of the debates will likely stifle some spontaneity, news networks deserve credit for drawing the line at provisions of the agreement intended to limit pool cameras to certain angles. The agreement also would prohibit camera shots of one candidate while the other is answering questions. These restrictions would not permit an accurate presentation of the debate. If one candidate sighs or rolls his eyes while his opponent speaks — as Democrat Al Gore did in the 2000 presidential debates — voters should be able to assess for themselves what it means.

The debates, obviously, can't be a free-for-all. The sponsoring organization has a responsibility to establish ground rules to ensure a free and fair exchange of ideas, such as time limits and formatting. But the rules should not be so prohibitive that the discussion is devoid of the one-liners and gaffes that tend to make presidential debates memorable.

As much as the candidates want conditions that help them avoid the goof that becomes the stuff of late-night television spoofs, the candidates need to understand that viewers expect engaging discussion about difficult issues. Some 46 million people witnessed the first presidential debate in 2000. To put that in some perspective, consider that 90 million viewers worldwide watched the last Super Bowl and 27.6 million people watched the season finale of Donald Trump's "The Apprentice."

We hope Americans place a higher value on their nation's political future than they do the outcome of a football game or a contrived reality show. Moreover, it is hoped that the debates, as scripted as they are, are thoughtful exchanges that focus more on matters of substance and less on the trappings of the respective political campaigns.