The cancellation of the March 28 presidential-vice presidential tandem debate is brought about by the regrettable common decision of major candidates to snub the urgent and important opportunity sought by the public to know them better.

The Commission on Elections should step in immediately, hold a meeting with the candidates and third parties (media, election watchdogs and voter education drives) and immediately form a Committee on Debates. This committee should come up with a schedule of debates to be broadcast nationally on prime time television, radio and the internet.

This Comelec meeting should be held soon and a debate should be organized before April 10 when our overseas Filipino workers and migrants start to cast their votes. With about 40 days left in the national and local campaign period, we can have as many debates as the candidates and the public want – but it is dependent on (1) Comelec’s power to compel them, (2) the candidates’ commitment to face their foes and the public; (3) the media’s readiness to broadcast the debate on prime time.

Major media networks ABS-CBN, GMA Network and TV5 could alternately “host” three debates and depending on the networks’ consensus, could simulcast it across the three networks. We cannot trust government networks led by NBN simply because of the obvious partisanship it has shown toward the administration presidential candidate.

We also have yet to be given an opportunity to see the senatorial candidates and partylist contenders in a debate. While interest in the senatorial race remains high, perhaps due to the public’s familiarity with traditional politicians now seeking to dominate it again, a debate would provide newcomers an equal footing with them even for a short time.

Media watchdog Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility has lamented the puny and negligible coverage on the partylist elections. This system which seeks to empower the marginalized is still also marginalized in terms of media coverage. Perhaps the media, on their own or upon the initiative of the Comelec, should organize forums featuring the contenders. This is also crucial so we could confirm once and for all the entry of traditional politicians and other vested interests in the partylist system.

A sizeable percentage of the electorate remain undecided and would make their decision in the run-up to May 10. Those who have made their choice may also still have a change of heart, thanks to the free flow of information and free-wheeling discussions and debates among the candidates. We cannot be made to depend solely on the advertisements (which may be many but only give a glimpse) and campaign sorties (which are fleeting roadshows with a limited reach).
The cancellation of the March 28 presidential-vice presidential tandem debate is brought about by the regrettable common decision of major candidates to snub the urgent and important opportunity sought by the public to know them better.

The Commission on Elections should step in immediately, hold a meeting with the candidates and third parties (media, election watchdogs and voter education drives) and immediately form a Committee on Debates. This committee should come up with a schedule of debates to be broadcast nationally on prime time television, radio and the internet.

This Comelec meeting should be held soon and a debate should be organized before April 10 when our overseas Filipino workers and migrants start to cast their votes. With about 40 days left in the national and local campaign period, we can have as many debates as the candidates and the public want – but it is dependent on (1) Comelec’s power to compel them, (2) the candidates’ commitment to face their foes and the public; (3) the media’s readiness to broadcast the debate on prime time.

Major media networks ABS-CBN, GMA Network and TV5 could alternately “host” three debates and depending on the networks’ consensus, could simulcast it across the three networks. We cannot trust government networks led by NBN simply because of the obvious partisanship it has shown toward the administration presidential candidate.

We also have yet to be given an opportunity to see the senatorial candidates and partylist contenders in a debate. While interest in the senatorial race remains high, perhaps due to the public’s familiarity with traditional politicians now seeking to dominate it again, a debate would provide newcomers an equal footing with them even for a short time.

Media watchdog Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility has lamented the puny and negligible coverage on the partylist elections. This system which seeks to empower the marginalized is still also marginalized in terms of media coverage. Perhaps the media, on their own or upon the initiative of the Comelec, should organize forums featuring the contenders. This is also crucial so we could confirm once and for all the entry of traditional politicians and other vested interests in the partylist system.

A sizeable percentage of the electorate remain undecided and would make their decision in the run-up to May 10. Those who have made their choice may also still have a change of heart, thanks to the free flow of information and free-wheeling discussions and debates among the candidates. We cannot be made to depend solely on the advertisements (which may be many but only give a glimpse) and campaign sorties (which are fleeting roadshows with a limited reach).