Our Opinion: Debate format favors conflict over clarity

The first presidential debate was a disappointment, from before the beginning to beyond the end.

The debate was hyped as political theater, not an opportunity for the candidates - Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Donald Trump - to explain, clarify and defend their positions on national and international issues.

And we - an anticipated Super Bowl-sized television audience of 100 million viewers - tuned in seeking conflict, not clarity.

Much of pre-debate jargon was reminiscent of a boxing match. Would Trump be able to retain his composure amid a flurry of jabs from Clinton? Would one candidate score a knockout punch?

In addition, the debate format was tailored to expectations that the attention span of viewers is no more than two minutes. The result was repeated oversimplification of complex issues while being interrupted.

Did Monday's night's debate change anyone's mind? If so, we'd like to hear from you.

The debate format simply does not lend itself to comprehensive oratory on public policy.

Keep in mind, however, that the format is a reflection of what the debate organizers believe the viewers crave - zingers, put-downs, one-liners.

In the aftermath of the debate, an array of pundits have weighed in on "who won" - a pronouncement largely based on who they wanted to win.

In a departure from the usual, a Philadelphia Inquirer commentary recalled the Lincoln-Douglas debates, where each speaker was given 90 minutes to explain his viewpoint.

The newspaper wrote: "Imagine if Clinton and Trump spent 90 minutes discussing how their approaches to fighting the war on terrorism would differ from President Barack Obama's. The moderator could ask specific questions after the candidates had outlined their foreign policies. Perhaps each candidate would get to ask the other a question on the topic as well. One-line zingers wouldn't be all that was remembered."

Now, that's a formula designed to provide thoughtful analysis of the complicated issues facing our nation and its citizens.

But would it attract viewers and boost ratings?