© 2026 WJCT Public Media
Donate Now
Play Live Radio
Next Up:
0:00
0:00
0:00 0:00
Available On Air Stations
Open to Debate Logo
Open to Debate

Open to Debate is the only media platform in the country devoted to promoting healthy, nonpartisan, debate-driven dialogue. It stands as a meeting ground for the intellectually curious, where individuals with contrasting perspectives can interact respectfully and openly.

The crux of the mission is to champion an open mind for problem-solving, both on individual and national levels. At its core, "Open to Debate" is a clarion call to dispense with contempt and embrace constructive dialogue, showing respect for diverse perspectives and the intrinsic worth of an informed debate.

Recognizing that the future of American democracy hinges on bridging divides, "Open to Debate" counters destructive "Us vs. Them" narratives. Its goal is to reintroduce critical thinking, fact-based reasoning, and civility into the public square, creating a model for the nation that values a free exchange of ideas.

The influence of "Open to Debate" is palpable - 32% of its audience shift their views on controversial issues post-debate, testifying to the potency of respectful discourse.

The program unfolds on public radio, through podcasts, and digital videos, persistently fostering an environment where divergent viewpoints can engage in respectful and open-minded debate.

Formerly known as "Intelligence Squared U.S. Debates", the show rebranded as "Open to Debate" to more accurately portray its mission and commitment to addressing deep-seated national polarization. The name embodies the ethos of being open - to listening, to disagreements, to understanding, to learning, and to recognizing "the other side".

  • Innovation or Intrusion: The Big Data Debate
    Every click, search, and online purchase feeds the data economy, driving AI, global business, and even political campaigns. But with risks growing in the private and public spheres, is Big Data advancing society or undermining its foundations? Supporters argue Big Data powers innovation by fueling breakthroughs in medicine, public health, and everyday efficiency. Yet critics warn that it erodes privacy, concentrates power, and threatens democracy. In the age of algorithms and analytics, is Big Data a necessary innovation or a dangerous intrusion? Arguing "Innovation": Kenneth Cukier, Deputy Executive Editor at The Economist Arguing "Intrusion": Carissa Véliz, Associate Professor at the Faculty of Philosophy and the Institute for Ethics in AI at the University of Oxford Xenia Wickett, Geopolitical strategist, moderator at Wickett Advisory, and Trustee of Transparency International UK, is the guest moderator. Join the conversation on our Substack—share your perspective on this episode and subscribe to our weekly newsletter for curated insights from our debaters, moderators, and staff. Follow us on YouTube, Instagram, LinkedIn, X, Facebook, and TikTok to stay connected with our mission and ongoing debates. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
  • Is It OK to Pay for Sex?
    Prostitution remains heavily stigmatized and legally complex globally. Those in favor of paying for sex and support decriminalization argue that it’s a profession that deserves as much respect as any other. Those against it, and who support the Nordic Model, argue that prostitution leads to inequities between sex buyers and workers, exploitation, and coercion, and can open the door to human trafficking. Now we debate: Is It OK to Pay for Sex? Arguing Yes: Kaytlin Bailey, Sex Workers Rights Advocate; Founder & Executive Director of Old Pros and Host of “The Oldest Profession Podcast” Arguing No: Yasmin Vafa, Human Rights Attorney; Co-Founder and Executive Director at Rights4Girls Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
  • Does AA Work?
    Millions of people have credited Alcoholics Anonymous with helping them stay sober from alcohol, but is it the best path for everyone? Those who say “yes” argue it is easily accessible to all and that its structure through the 12-step program helps people succeed. Those who say “no” argue say the abstinence model doesn’t work for everyone and there may be better alternatives. Now we debate: Does AA Work? Arguing Yes: Dan Griffin, Expert on Alcoholics Anonymous; Author of “A Man’s Way Through the Twelve Steps” Arguing No: Adi Jaffe, Founder of IGNTD; Author of “The Abstinence Myth” Nayeema Raza, Journalist and Co-Host of the Semafor Podcast “Mixed Signals”, is the guest moderator. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
  • Has Feminism Hurt Women?
    From the 19th Amendment to the #MeToo movement, the feminist movement has profoundly reshaped society. But have its good intentions backfired? Those arguing it hasn’t note that it’s allowed women the choice of living on their own terms. But critics argue that its culture glorifying full-time careerism and independence can make women feel inadequate if they prefer traditional roles like having a family. Now we debate: Has Feminism Hurt Women? Arguing Yes: Inez Stepman, Senior Policy and Legal Analyst at the Independent Women's Forum and Independent Women’s Law Center Arguing No: Wendy Walsh, Relationship Journalist; Host of ”The Dr. Wendy Walsh Show” on iHeart Radio’s KFI AM 640 Xenia Wickett, Geopolitical strategist, moderator at Wickett Advisory, and Trustee of Transparency International UK, is the guest moderator. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
  • Can Religion Cure the Loneliness Epidemic?
    America is suffering from a loneliness epidemic. Some groups have suggested religious communities may be key to solving it. Could it help? Those arguing “yes” say it gives people regular social contact, support systems, and a sense of purpose that could combat isolation. Those arguing “no” say that secular options would provide better, broad-based solutions. Now we debate: Can Religion Cure the Loneliness Epidemic? Arguing Yes: Harold Koenig, Director of Duke University’s Center for Spirituality, Theology and Health Chris Murphy, Senator from Connecticut Arguing No: Ruth Whippman, Author of "America the Anxious: How Our Pursuit of Happiness Is Creating a Nation of Nervous Wrecks" and "BOYMOM: Reimagining Boyhood in the Age of Impossible Masculinity." Dan Barker, Co-President of the Freedom from Religion Foundation Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
  • How to Resolve Conflicts in Relationships: A Conversation with Esther Perel
    Couples have arguments over many topics. However, it’s through resolving conflict that both people in the relationship feel heard and seen. Psychotherapist, relationship expert, and New York Times-bestselling author Esther Perel says conflict when navigated skillfully can lead to growth, resilience, and a stronger bond. In this conversation with John Donvan, Perel shares her experience working with different relationship types, strategies for transforming conflict into a constructive dialogue, and the importance of validating both sides’ perspectives. Our guest: Esther Perel, Psychotherapist and New York Times bestselling author Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates. Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
  • Tech Titans or Tyrants: Should the U.S. Government Break Up Big Tech?
    Has Big Tech become too powerful? Amazon, Apple, Alphabet, Meta, and Microsoft shape how we shop, communicate, and consume information. But has their dominance gone too far? Advocates argue these firms are monopolies that harm competition, exploit consumer data, and wield disproportionate influence over public discourse. Structural reforms would restore fairness and innovation. But critics warn that breakups could damage user experience, slow innovation, and disrupt integrated ecosystems people rely on. Now we debate: Should the U.S. Government Break Up Big Tech? Arguing Yes: Bharat Ramamurti, Founder of The Bully Pulpit; Former Deputy Director of the National Economic Council Matt Stoller, Director of Research at the American Economic Liberties Project Arguing No: Geoffrey A. Manne, President and Founder of the International Center for Law & Economics Jennifer Huddleston, Senior Fellow in Technology Policy at the Cato Institute Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates This debate was produced in partnership with the SNF Agora Institute at Johns Hopkins University, as part of The Hopkins Forum series. It was recorded in front of a live audience on Thursday, December 4, 2025 at the Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg Center. Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates. Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
  • INSIDE THE DEBATE with John Donvan, Nayeema Raza, and Nick Gillespie
    What does it take to moderate a debate? How do we keep conversations civil when the world feels so polarized? In celebration of our launch on Substack, moderator-in-chief John Donvan joins Nayeema Raza and Reason’s Nick Gillespie for a lively conversation on the craft of moderation and the art of asking questions that reveal rather than inflame. Featuring audience Q&A and behind-the-scenes insight, this episode offers a candid look at how meaningful dialogue is created today. Our Guests: John Donvan, Open to Debate's Moderator-in-Chief and Emmy award-winning journalist Nayeema Raza, Journalist and Host of "Smart Girl Dumb Questions" Nick Gillespie, Editor-at-Large at Reason Debates Referenced During this Inside Edition 13:03 - Should America End Birthright Citizenship? 19:22 - Is It Time To Break Up With Dating Apps? 20:34 - Replace Private Insurance with Medicare for All 20:38 - Should We Legalize Drugs? 20:41 - Preserve Net Neutrality: All Data Is Created Equal 21:14 - Is America Too Obsessed With Race? 27:04 - Is the American Dream in Decline? 28:35 - The Universal Basic Income Is The Safety Net Of The Future Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
  • Does the Effective Altruism Movement Get Giving Right?
    Effective altruism is a philosophical and social movement that uses empirical data to maximize the impact of charitable efforts. Those who champion EA praise its methodological framework for maximizing the effectiveness of donations, thus ensuring equal consideration for all individuals. Those who challenge EA argue that its emphasis on measurable outcomes may overlook important yet hard-to-quantify causes, potentially restricting the scope of what's considered beneficial. Now we debate: Does the Effective Altruism Movement Get Giving Right? Arguing Yes: Peter Singer, Author of “The Most Good You Can Do”; Philosopher and Emeritus Professor of Bioethics at the University Center for Human Values at Princeton University Arguing No: Alice Crary, Co-Editor of “The Good it Promises, The Harm it Does: Critical Essays on Effective Altruism”; University Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at The New School for Social Research Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Visit our Substack to watch more insightful debates and subscribe to our newsletter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
  • Should the U.S. Militarize the War on Drugs?
    he Trump administration is taking the War on Drugs in a bold direction, using aircraft carriers, intelligence networks, and direct military strikes to target alleged smuggling vessels in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific. Supporters of militarization argue that previous strategies to stop cartels have failed, and only aggressive deterrence will stop the crisis. Others warn that militarization usually fails to stop drug flows, risking civilian casualties, and rarely achieves lasting results. Now we debate: Should the U.S. Militarize the War on Drugs? Arguing Yes: Sean McFate, Author and Professor of Strategy at the National Defense University and Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service Andrés Martínez-Fernández, Senior Policy Analyst for Latin America at The Heritage Foundation's Allison Center for National Security Arguing No: Will Freeman, Fellow for Latin America Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations Aileen Teague, Assistant Professor of International Affairs at Texas A&M University's Bush School of Government and Public Service Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Visit our Substack to watch more insightful debates and subscribe to our newsletter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices