The incredible disappearing debate Critics say the flap over the showdown between Rogers and Kennedy proves that TV doesn’t do enough to inform the public BY IAN DONNIS

ALTHOUGH CONGRESSIONAL candidate David Rogers’s unconventional campaign tactic of making a piecemeal swim of the First Congressional District has invited some ribbing, the two-time Republican challenger to US Representative Patrick J. Kennedy has reason to call it a matter of pragmatism. When a local television reporter responded to the introduction of the gimmicky approach by asking whether it was meant to draw television cameras, Rogers recalls, "I fired back, ‘Will it work?,’ " and the reporter indicated, yes, indeed, that it would.

Getting satisfaction from WJAR-TV (Channel 10) has proved more difficult for Rogers when it comes to squaring off during a full-fledged televised evening debate with Kennedy. In a letter dated September 21, the station invited Rogers to participate in a live 45-minute debate with Kennedy on Tuesday, October 26, followed by a 15-minute panel discussion. But the station rescinded the offer a few days later, substituting a proposed 30-minute debate to be broadcast at 11 a.m. on Sunday, October 31. WJAR spokeswoman Clare Eckert notes that the October 31 broadcast would benefit from the potential lead-in audience of NBC’s popular Meet the Press, and she describes Channel 10’s political coverage as thorough.

For Rogers, though, the experience has proven something of a rude awakening, leading him to join critics who contend that local television stations — which profit handsomely from political commercials during busy campaign seasons — are falling down on their obligation to help inform the public. In an unusual spin-off over the last two weeks, Rogers’s campaign has run a 30-second commercial about 100 times on Channel 10, to the tune of about $30,000, blasting it for "helping" Kennedy to dodge scrutiny. During the commercial — which WJAR is obligated to run because of federal election laws — Rogers stands in front of an American flag, using harsh terms and insisting through his thinly veiled outrage, "Channel 10 wants to run Access Hollywood and pocket a buck rather than give you a live one-hour 7 p.m. Rogers-Kennedy debate." The reference is to one of the half-hour celebrity-based shows — the other is Extra — that Channel 10 broadcasts weekdays between 7 and 8 p.m.

When WJAR tried to make amends by offering to transmit a half-hour debate to Channel 36, the state’s PBS station, on Thursday, October 28 at 7 p.m. and repeat it on Channel 10 on Halloween morning, Rogers wasn’t mollified. The Republican former Navy SEAL, who lost to Kennedy by a 60 percent-37 percent margin in 2002, rebuffed the entreaty as a point of pride, insisting that the substitute doesn’t come close to the prominence or potential audience of the original October 26 debate. After Channel 10 featured a one-hour exchange between himself and Kennedy during the busier political season of 2002, Rogers contends that the perennial local ratings leader is backsliding into a greater emphasis on celebrity fluff. As he put it during a recent protest outside WJAR’s Cranston headquarters, "For one television station to refuse to offer one hour of their access time every two years calls into question whether the owners of that television station should continue to hold their license to broadcast over the public airwaves."

Of course, assessing the performance of commercial broadcasters in reporting on politics depends on where you sit. In 2000, WJAR and WPRI-WNAC (Channels 12 and 64) pledged to try to include five minutes of political coverage during their 5-6:30 p.m. newscasts. "That’s not very much, but it’s more than most states across the country," says H. Philip West Jr., the executive director of Common Cause of Rhode Island, which has advocated for more such coverage by local TV affiliates. As it turns out, West says, the two stations came out in the top 20 in the country in a national study by the University of Southern California’s Annenberg School for Communication. (WLNE-TV, Channel 6, is in something of a different category since it offers an hour, rather than 90 minutes, of evening news.)

Despite the relatively high performance of local stations, West echoes Rogers’s view that WJAR’s withdrawal of its original debate offer is emblematic of how broadcasters are generally offering less political coverage and not doing enough to inform the public. "To me, it’s a great disappointment," he says. By contrast, West says, Channel 10 did a great job with the gubernatorial debate in 2002, offering the only chance for many Rhode Islanders to see Myrth York and Donald Carcieri, the eventual winner, square off. "That seemed to me to be a real breakthrough for commercial television, which has been in a pell-mell retreat from serious political coverage," he says. "For them to take an hour of primetime, uninterrupted by commercials, for a gubernatorial debate, was a huge contribution to the public."

West notes the perception that Rogers is "probably not going to beat Patrick Kennedy. Maybe that’s the calculus they [WJAR] reached, but the issues are deserving of debate, and the people should get a chance to hear their positions, and to see Kennedy and Rogers go head to head. That’s what democracy is all about."

Eckert maintains that Channel 10 does an enormous amount on political topics, ranging from its daily newscasts, Web site (which includes information on Rhode Island ballot questions, the stances of George W. Bush and John Kerry, and election resources, including details on polling places, among other things), the Sunday morning 10 News Conference, and a new half-hour Sunday show, to voter-registration efforts at community events. "We’re dedicated to delivering the information, especially during political season, to all of the viewers in our area," she says. "We understand that people turn to us, and we’re there to support them."

When it came to the rationale for changing the station’s original offer, Eckert says it "was strictly based on a programming decision to provide our viewers the most comprehensive access." This claim seems questionable, however, particularly since Liz Fischer, another WJAR spokeswoman, had previously told the Providence Journal that the station wanted to give equal time to candidates in the First and Second Congressional Districts, and "we could not offer both races a live debate at 7 p.m." Similarly, although Kennedy spokesman Ernesto Anguilla says he was unsure of all the things that went into the decision, he told the Phoenix, "Channel 10 has informed us that it’s not able to offer equal time to both congressional races, which is a requisite for them."

As it stands, Rogers and Kennedy are set to debate at least for an hour, according to their campaigns. They’re scheduled to appear with Jack White and the Providence Journal’s Scott MacKay on Newsmakers (the show will be broadcast on WPRI on Saturday, October 16 at 7:30 p.m., and the following day at 6:30 a.m. on WPRI and 10 a.m. on Channel 64), and on The Truman Taylor Show (to be broadcast on the Rhode Island News Channel at 8 p.m. on Wednesday, October 20).

Kennedy has agreed to a larger quantity of televised debate, Anguilla says, adding, "David Rogers has accepted only half of that to our knowledge. David Rogers is out there on the stump, complaining and bellyaching that Patrick Kennedy is hiding. David Rogers has not accepted as much debate time as Patrick Kennedy has. It’s an absolutely ludicrous claim."

A certain amount of unscientific judgment not uncommonly comes into political coverage by television stations and newspapers. As a philosophical matter, it’s perfectly reasonable for Channel 10 to want to give equal time to the challengers and incumbents in the state’s two congressional districts. Still, there are distinctions to be drawn the two races. The opponents of US Representative Jim Langevin — Republican Chuck Barton and independents Ed Morabito and Dorman Hayes — are essentially token candidates. Rogers, a conservative wrapping himself in a more moderate mantle this time around, remains an underdog against Patrick Kennedy. A challenger to Kennedy will always be able to tap into a national network of Kennedy foes. Rogers’s ability to make his second serious challenge, however — raising $2 million in 2002 and slightly less in this campaign season — demonstrates his seriousness as a candidate. As he says, "If I don’t get a debate, what have I been working for all this time?"