COMMENT | The case against live debates

COMMENT | I had already lost interest in the cabotage policy debate between Wee Ka Siong and Lim Guan Eng before it began.

Every day, there is a new post by either side listing their version of facts regarding the date, platform, or format.

Almost without fail, each post is meant to imply that the other side is a coward and they have something to hide.

But I don’t blame them because, in a way, this is part of the debate – the pre-debate public taunt, similar to a pre-fight taunt in a boxing match between Muhammad Ali and George Foreman.

More and more people are starting to argue that politicians’ live debates are outliving their utility.

Heavily scripted, extensively prepared, and inherently theatrical, live debates are about shoring up your popularity by running out the other debater.

The highlights of the debate are typically witty comments about the other person’s character rather than an ingenious idea or a nuanced policy opinion.

How much of the cabotage policy debate will be about cabotage instead of MCA’s or DAP’s past failures?

Even if we assume that the debate was purely about policy...