The Rumble: Shaking Things Up

  As we have discussed in class, as well as seen from the media, debates bring big audiences. Historically this may have been much more so as it was necessary to watch the speakers spar in person in what came to be seen as a form of entertainment. Now, debates usually come in a televised form showing candidates (usually for a high office) disagreeing with each other and vaguely explaining their plans.

  This past Saturday, however, debates got a new meaning in this media age. Political pundits Jon Stewart (of Comedy Central’s The Daily Show) exchanged heated discussion with Fox News’s Bill O’Reilly (from The O’ReillyFactor) at an event known as “The Rumble in the Air-Conditioned Auditorium.” The event had a live audience at George Washington University and could be streamed online here, with some of the proceeds going to charity. Having had the first official presidential debate of the season only a few days before, it was easy to contrast the distinct debating styles and atmospheres.

  Clearly, “The Rumble” was not taken as seriously as the presidential debate as both men are seen more as entertainers than politicians, which was obvious given some of their sarcastic retorts and lighthearted moments. This resulted in the debated being relaxed, less formal, and with fewer rules. The actual presidential debates, on the other hand, follow a strict format and a certain amount of composure is expected of the candidates. If we are to compare the first presidential debate of 2012 and “The Rumble,” I would say that the stiff format of the former stifles creativity and takes away many key moments that may teach us more about the candidates. By contrast, the latter example allows the speakers to say whatever they want, profanity and strong personal opinions included. Though it may not be as professional, it is more entertaining and lets the speakers loose to discuss their opinions.  

  Both Bill O’Reilly and Jon Stewart have political attitudes they showcase every night on television. They enjoy solid nightly audiences with their shows, both of which have very passionate viewers. But, despite them holding views that are (for the most part) polar opposite from one another, we get a clearer picture of the two sides of thinkers (conservative/liberal) that shape the election. Despite their political differences, O’Reilly and Stewart still managed to come together on one stage to engage in an organized political debate that gave us some actual answers on the opinions of the two men. Rather than shying away from criticism from the opposing side, Stewart and O’Reilly had much less fear in expressing their honest opinions about hard-hitting issues. An important factor is that neither of them is running for election or has to worry about getting votes. Whereas presidential candidates, whether leaning left or right, try to tout their policies as more “middle-of-the-road,” these two men explicitly explained their ideas without fear of repercussions such as losing popularity among voters.

  As entertaining and interesting as it may be, “The Rumble” has no direct impact on the actual election as neither O’Reilly nor Stewart are candidates, but it does demonstrate the importance of political debating and the deep interest the American public has in it. The fact that two pundits with wildly different viewpoints can agree to debate each other live gives me some hope in this highly divided era. The event highlights the importance of democracy and the freedom we have as Americans to openly express our own political opinions, even in front of others who we know strongly disagree with us. During this (mock) debate, we learned the true opinions of the speakers, who weren’t afraid to step into territory considered “too liberal” or “too conservative” and were willing to admit defeat if their opponent made a better case for a particular position. “The Rumble,” as compared to more formal debates, was overall more informative, more enjoyable, and more productive.

 I’d like to end this post with one of my favorite (and most directly honest) quotes from the night, as stated by Jon Stewart: “Why is it that if you take advantage of a corporate tax break you’re a smart businessman, but if you take advantage of something so you don’t go hungry, you’re a moocher?”