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".

Mock Trial: Should Trump’s Conviction Stand?

Donald Trump was found guilty of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records, but legal scholars question whether it could be overturned in an appeal or due to a new Supreme Court ruling. Those arguing for New York say no individual, even a president, is above the law. Those arguing for the defendant say his actions were within the scope of his official duties. Now we debate: Mock Trial: Should Trump’s Conviction Stand? For the Appellee: Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean of the UC Berkeley School of Law For the Appellant: Randy Zelin, Trial Attorney; Adjunct Law Professor at Cornell Law School Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Should Biden Step Aside?

President Biden continues to dismiss concerns about seeking re-election. But after a disappointing debate performance, some Democratic leaders are increasingly concerned about whether he’s still fit to lead. Those in support of Biden argue his withdrawal would fragment Democrats and they don’t want to risk losing undecided voters to Trump. Those calling for him to step aside argue that a new candidate could re-energize the Democratic base and improve election chances. Now, we debate: Should Biden Step Aside? Arguing Yes: Michelle Goldberg, Opinion Columnist at The New York Times Arguing No: Dmitri Mehlhorn, Co-Founder of Investing In US Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Please note: This discussion was recorded on July 11th before the assassination attempt on former President Trump. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
History Lessons About Combatting Polarization in 2024 with Fareed Zakaria

From AI to the political climate during an election year, our modern world is constantly changing and facing more polarization than before. How can we combat it and adapt to a changing America? CNN host and bestselling author Fareed Zakaria says you have to be open-minded and embrace compromise. In this conversation with John Donvan, Zakaria discusses our current revolutionary times, how past revolutions can help us understand our present, and why despite everything, he’s still hopeful. Our Guest: Fareed Zakaria, Host of CNN's Fareed Zakaria GPS; Author of "Age of Revolutions: Progress and Backlash from 1600 to the Present" Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Is Wokeness Killing Comedy?

What George Carlin jokes would be deemed offensive today? What makes us laugh has come under scrutiny. Old jokes or skits are often off-limits in today's context, leading to public apologies and cancellations. Some argue political correctness stifles comedic creativity, thus affecting their ability to tackle tough subjects. Those who disagree say comedy has always evolved with changing norms and it can still flourish within wokeness. This week we revisit one of our favorite debates from the past year: is Wokeness Killing Comedy? Against this background, we debate the question: Is Wokeness Killing Comedy? This debate will take place in front of a live audience, on Wednesday, September 20, 2023 at The Comedy Cellar’s Village Underground in New York City. Warning that this content is not made for kids. Arguing Yes: Lou Perez, Comedian, Producer, Author of "That Joke Isn't Funny Anymore" Arguing No: Michael Ian Black, Actor and Comedian Nick Gillespie, Editor-at-Large of Reason, guest moderates Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Married or Single?

Marriage has long been considered a goal to aspire to and a conventional path to happiness. But over the last few decades, the traditional view of marriage as the cornerstone of adult life has been questioned. Changes in economic conditions, gender roles, and cultural values have fueled a reevaluation of whether marriage is still desirable or necessary for personal fulfillment and social stability. Those who believe it’s better to get married argue that married individuals report better physical and mental well-being, compared to single adults. They also experience economic and social benefits. Those who believe it’s better to be single say singledom helps promote independence, allows individuals to make decisions freely, makes it likely to create broader social networks and communities, and feel more fulfilled than they would if they felt pressured to be partnered. Whether you are in a relationship or not, we debate the following prompt: Married or Single? Arguing Married: Jonathan Rothwell, Principal Economist at Gallup Arguing Single: Bella DePaulo, Social Scientist and Author of "Singled Out" and "Single at Heart" Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Is Islam Antisemitic?

Though they share similar values, guidelines, and principles, Islam and Judaism have a long, complicated relationship that has led to tension recorded within the Quran that might engender antisemitism. Those who agree argue that certain Quranic verses could be used to justify some people’s hostility towards Jews. Those who disagree say that references to Jews must be understood in their historical and textual contexts and there have been multiple periods of Muslim-Jewish tolerance. Now we debate: Is Islam Antisemitic? Arguing Yes: Tim Dieppe, Head of Policy at Christian Concern Arguing No: Reza Aslan, Iranian-American Religion Scholar; Bestselling Author of "Zealot" Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
MOCK TRIAL: Murthy v. Missouri - Free speech, Government and Misinformation on Social Media Platforms

The Supreme Court will soon decide on a case whether government interference on social media is coercive and suppresses free speech. Those who argue legitimate cooperation say that where misinformation threatens public health or safety, they are justified to protect the public. Those argue coercion believe that increased content moderation could lead to authoritarian control over public discourse online. Now we debate: Mock Trial: Free Speech, Government, and Misinformation on Social Media Platforms. Plaintiff: Charles "Chip" Miller, Senior Attorney at the Institute for Free Speech Defendant: Rylee Sommers-Flanagan, Founder and Executive Director of Upper Seven Law Cross examiners: Nina Jankowicz, CEO of The American Sunlight Project; Former Executive Director of the Department of Homeland Security's Disinformation Governance Board Matt Taibbi, Best-selling Author and Journalist; Writer and Publisher of Racket News Eric Schurenberg, Business Journalist and Media Executive; Founder of the Alliance for Trust in Media Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates 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, ranging from full decriminalization to controlled regulation like the Nordic Model, where only purchasers of sex, not sellers of sex are penalized. This model has been implemented in eight countries, including Sweden, Iceland, Canada, and France, as well as in the U.S. state of Maine. Those who argue that it is ok to pay for sex say that it’s a profession that deserves as much respect as any other and that those who do it for a living have a right to do with their bodies as they please. They also argue that decriminalizing the profession is the only method to reduce violence against sex workers. Those who say that it is not ok to pay for sex and support the Nordic model are concerned about inequities present between sex buyers and sex workers that are rooted in oppression and power imbalances, as some sex workers choose the profession under economic or social duress. They are also concerned about exploitation and coercion, which can sometimes open the door to human trafficking. With this background, we debate the following question: 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
Is Taiwan Indefensible?

China recently conducted two days of military exercises around Taiwan as a “punishment” for “separatist acts” by Taiwan’s new president. Beijing sees Taiwan as territory that needs to be “reunified” with the mainland, while the U.S. is Taiwan’s strongest backer. Some argue that China’s military presence is too large to stop and the island nation is indefensible. Those who disagree argue that American credibility is on the line and they should stand by their political posturing. Now we debate: Is Taiwan Indefensible? With this background, we debate the question: Is Taiwan Indefensible? Arguing Yes: Lyle L. Goldstein, Research Professor in the China Maritime Studies Institute at the U.S. Naval War College; Charlie Glaser, Professor of Political Science and International Affairs at George Washington University Arguing No: Elbridge Colby, Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense; Elizabeth Larus, Professor of Political Science and International Affairs at University of Mary Washington Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Young Voices Debate Tough Topics: DEI and Climate Change

Two days. Four questions. Ten judges and high school students participating in the national championship run by Incubate Debate, the U.S.’s fastest-growing high school debate league. This is what civil debate in the public square looks like — and what it can be across the country. Join us as we follow eight students who debate the following questions: “Should College DEI Programs Be Abolished?” and “Is Climate Change An Emergency?” Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices