Voters deserve live debates, not tape-delayed substitutes

M onday, Gov. Larry Hogan and Ben Jealous will step to the podium for their first and only debate of this election year.

There was talk about how many gubernatorial debates there would be. The Hogan campaign accepted an invitation to two debates. The Jealous campaign insisted on five debates but then, oddly, as negotiations really began showed that the campaign really only wanted one debate all along.

There are other debates in statewide races forthcoming as well. Attorney

General Brian Frosh finally agreed to debate challenger Craig Wolf only after being approached by Wolf about the need to debate, though Frosh currently refuses to debate Wolf in a televised debate. U.S. Senate Candidates Ben Cardin, Tony Campbell, and Neal Smith are tentatively scheduled to have two debates in October.

Debates are an important part of the election process. But there is a problem lurking under the surface with all of our statewide debates.

The Hogan-Jealous debate will air on at 7 p.m. Monday. But it will be taped at 11 that morning. This is the arrangement used this year in the Democratic primary as well.

It's 2018. I can request a car on my phone, I can order almost movie and have it delivered straight to my device, but we can't get debates between statewide candidates for governor, attorney general, and U.S. Senate broadcast live in prime time?

Tape-delayed debates are a disservice to voters. Don't get me wrong; most voters are better served with a debate airing in prime-time than one airing at 11 a.m. But having the debate at 11 should be a non-starter if the debate is going to be televised in prime time. What possible reason is there for a debate to be recorded and aired hours later as if it is some sort of made-for-TV airing of an Olympic event?

Voters are not well served by having debates on tape delay. By the time many voters are sitting down to watch this thing, many may have already snippets of facts from tweets or may have read the description of it in the paper. The candidates and their campaigns will come into the airing of the debate tonight with tailor-made, pre-packaged tweets and infographics ready to spin the debate toward their particular side.

How are voters supposed to make an informed decision when so much of the content, coverage and reaction may have prejudiced their thoughts?

Back in the late 1990s the World Wrestling Entertainment, looking to save a buck, pre-taped every other episode of their weekly flagship prime time Monday Night Raw shows. The live shows were unpredictable, interesting, and brought in good ratings for the USA Network The taped shows were edited, boring, predictable, and had lower ratings.

It doesn't take a lot of imagination to see the similarities here.

Debates are good and healthy and we should have quite a lot of them. But voters deserve to see the candidates live and not be left wondering if what they are seeing is real or if it's Memorex. Candidates should answer questions, rebut, debate, succeed, and fail with everybody watching at the same time, with no media, networks, or handlers getting a head start on spinning the narrative. They should do it live on television in a debate taking place in prime time.

And if the TV stations think it's too expensive or too much hassle, there are plenty of other ways to broadcast a debate live. During the primary, we successfully broadcast both the Anne Arundel County sheriff's debate and a U.S. Senate debate on Red Maryland using Facebook Live, with a great deal of success and no filter between the candidates and the voters.

With all of the concern about getting voters relevant and accurate information, voters deserve better than tape-delayed debates. That our local television outlets insist on them is a disservice to the community.