Public debate, at its most basic, involves two or more speakers arguing in front of an audience. The format is typically structured with opening remarks from the moderator and then questions and answers.
The defining characteristics of public debate are that it is open to all citizens and that both participants and audience members can question each other (Palczewski 2019). Debate is a communicative mode that, at its best, enables deliberation. Deliberation allows individuals to present their arguments for and against a particular action, which helps them make considered judgments consistent with their values. It also enables them to listen to the arguments of others and, in some cases, tolerate their views even though they may not agree with them (Garsten 2006).
It is important that people are able to express their views in a safe and public space, where they can be challenged without fear of reprisal. Authentic expressions of individual experience can elucidate concerns and views shared by many or call attention to general problems that deserve public attention. However, these expressions can be counterproductive when they become inextricably linked to the person and are defended as a part of their identity.
This is particularly problematic when the debates feature controversial perspectives such as those presented in the Munk Debates, which were widely seen as legitimizing dangerous far-right positions and establishing them as the authoritative frame for considering the future of Western democracy. It is critical to understand how and why some positions feature in debate and others do not, because this has normative significance.