Double-Duel-Debate

Interviews in most cases are a boring and biased way of promoting someone. There are like two basic scenarios.

  1. The journo is friendly and he is asking “your questions” that you have been written to promote yourself. This kind of marketing is obvious and easy to spot. The only clear message that the viewer/reader gets is that you are rich enough to purchase a journo, nothing less, nothing more.
  2. The journo is hostile and he wants to expose you. This supposed to be a fair fight where you put your arguments and the journo puts his so that the viewer can get a clear picture about the situation.

The reality is that you have no chances against the media. They control the timing, they control the subjects you are debating, and you are in their house playing their game. They have nothing to lose and you’ve got everything on the line.

Every interview I’ve seen looks unnatural and awkward. Nobody is been himself, nobody says “I do not know”, nobody walks away and so on…

I simply cannot imagine myself giving an interview (not that I have been ever invited to do so) that is why I tried to imagine what a fair interview would look like(regardless of the subject). Mainly it won’t be an interview but rather a Double-Duel-Debate.

The rules on the Double-Duel-Debate are inspired by the blitz chess game and the street ethics where there are no facilitators but rather people willing to risk something in order to prove something.

Double-Duel-Debate Rules

  • A Chess clock is been used.
  • The total time is divided equally for both opponents.
  • Each opponent can ask all sorts of questions.
  • When you are answering a question, it is your time that is passing.
  • When you are asking a question, it is the opponent’s time that is passing.
  • Opponents are asking and answering questions on a turn base.
  • Each may ask one additional clarifying question per question.
  • You can repeat the same question as much as you like.
  • You can interrupt and cut each opponents answer with “enough”.
  • When your time is over you cannot answer anymore, you can only ask questions until your opponents time is over.
  • Both opponents must have time to prepare for the debate.

All this rules must be tested and they may have some flows but to me the debate look far more natural and ethical way of presenting controversial information to the masses.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *