I was reading an article on slate.com earlier today and came across a review of the recent Democratic candidate debate (http://www.slate.com/id/2165132) on MSNBC. The author made several good points, but one that got me thinking was a brief comment on the format that MSNBC had employed. Debate format, especially for presidential primaries, is something that always falls under scrutiny and is a good example of how the media can make or break the performance of a candidate. Here's an example; MSNBC limited each response to no more than 60 seconds, and often demanded extremely punctuated rebuttals. This would benefit candidates like Clinton or Joe Biden who are well articulated but stiff in comparison to the others. But it would also lend a disadvantage to the Barack Obamas and John Edwards of the campaign who need time to develop a relationship with the audience and show the charisma and emotion that constitutes the basis of their appeal.

Clearly with the number of candidates running, more rigid time constraints are necessary to rein in those eager to steal the spotlight. But with no interruptions or camera hogging, it was pretty clear that the debate was lacking in the flare department. Instead of fiery responses and contradicting rhetoric, it seemed that all 8 were swimming in a sea of mediocrity for a large portion of the show.

I think that it should have been clear to everyone that this special should have been an hour at the most. 90 minutes is an unnecessary amount of time to be spending this early in the race, especially with so many candidates and a short response time. MSNBC picked right in having lead anchor Brian Williams moderate, but most of the time he was more long winded then the candidates themselves and is probably the reason why the creators had it last an hour and a half in the first place (aka Brian shut up and just ask the damn question).

Overall, MSNBC seemed more focused on developing a debate format that would hook viewers with simple, rapid fire answers and concise platforms. What they got was a loquacious media icon grilling eight people of extremely similar opinion and little to get angry about. Yes the format kept the conversation rolling but left no time for anyone to give a well articulated and complete answer. In this way, networks are only contributing to the perpetuation of cookie-cutter verbosity.