Alan Brown Jr.
Member
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2010
- Messages
- 34
I've completed a detailed analysis of the presidential debate.
Candidate - Questions/Rebuttals - Speaking Time
Perry: - 22 - 16:30
Romney: - 14 - 12:04
Bachmann: - 10 - 9:20
Huntsman - 9 - 9:58
Paul - 9 - 9:19
Gingrich - 6 - 6:59
Santorum - 6 - 6:13
Cain - 6 - 5:49
It scientifically confirms media favoritism (again) - the debate was practically a Perry/Romney infomercial. Perry got over twice the average time/questions/rebuttals. The media narrative that Perry and Romney dominated the debate is because - they staged it that way.
The differences are magnified if you add in the time spent on each candidate by the moderator (who spoke most of all.) They are multiplied further still by different questions being asked of each candidate - such as skipping some candidates on key issues like jobs or health care, or posing more politically risky questions to certain candidates, and selectively offering/denying rebuttals. A truly equal debate would allow every candidate the opportunity to explain his or her views on the same questions.
It would be an inadequate defense to claim correlation of speaking time to poll averages, as Paul would be third and Hunstsman dead last, with others placing differently as well. Beyond that, the public deserves equal time to hear each candidate - not a media bias to solidify positions and discouraging poll movement.
Below is the full second by second report and reference video in case anyone wants to double-check my numbers.
Candidate - Questions/Rebuttals - Speaking Time
Perry: - 22 - 16:30
Romney: - 14 - 12:04
Bachmann: - 10 - 9:20
Huntsman - 9 - 9:58
Paul - 9 - 9:19
Gingrich - 6 - 6:59
Santorum - 6 - 6:13
Cain - 6 - 5:49
It scientifically confirms media favoritism (again) - the debate was practically a Perry/Romney infomercial. Perry got over twice the average time/questions/rebuttals. The media narrative that Perry and Romney dominated the debate is because - they staged it that way.
The differences are magnified if you add in the time spent on each candidate by the moderator (who spoke most of all.) They are multiplied further still by different questions being asked of each candidate - such as skipping some candidates on key issues like jobs or health care, or posing more politically risky questions to certain candidates, and selectively offering/denying rebuttals. A truly equal debate would allow every candidate the opportunity to explain his or her views on the same questions.
It would be an inadequate defense to claim correlation of speaking time to poll averages, as Paul would be third and Hunstsman dead last, with others placing differently as well. Beyond that, the public deserves equal time to hear each candidate - not a media bias to solidify positions and discouraging poll movement.
Below is the full second by second report and reference video in case anyone wants to double-check my numbers.
Last edited: