Iowa Public Radio - Reaction to NPR/IPR Debates

NPR/Iowa Public Radio Post-Debate Survey Selected Findings

Background

This NPR Listens advisory panel survey was deployed immediately after the NPR/Iowa Public Radio Democratic presidential candidates' debate, held on December 4, 2007 in Des Moines. All responses were collected online using the NPR Listens advisory panel.

Membership in the panel is open to all public radio listeners who are not employed in the public broadcasting industry. For more information, visit NPR Listens.

Results Summary

Survey respondents generally complimented the format and content of the NPR/Iowa Public Radio debate. They described it as "more a round table discussion . . . than a debate" and "more engrossing and sustainable than the TV debates." Most agreed the moderators were fair and asked the right questions.

While listeners liked the debate's focus on three issues (Iran, China and immigration), many respondents criticized our choice of themes. Said one, "You didn't ask questions about regular Americans' lives. What about roads and bridges and social security and health care and education and the general malaise of all our social structures?"

Most respondents said the debate did not change their feeling(s) about the candidates. Also, very few listeners thought there was a clear "winner" in the debate. However, after hearing the debate, many listeners reported having a better understanding of candidates' positions on key issues. The two-hour length was just right, a majority said, but most respondents weren't able to hear the entire debate. Many were working or running errands while listening.

Just under one-third of respondents (32%) said they're "very likely" to listen to NPR's Republican presidential candidate debate in 2008; an additional 40% said they're "somewhat likely." However, several respondents said they're already fatigued by the amount of election coverage on NPR. Some simply don't care about Iowa, while others are overwhelmed by election-themed content in general, thinking it's far too early for this hype.

Other Observations

Debate Format

Many respondents praised the three-topic approach. Still, some listeners disagreed with our selection of issues. In particular, listeners questioned the exclusion of health care and global warming as focal issues.
Respondents thought two hours was a good length, if not a bit long.Three-quarters of respondents (74%) said the length of the debate was "just right."
There isn't a "right" number of moderators in an NPR debate.When asked how many moderators an NPR debate should ideally have, respondents didn't have a clear answer. The plurality--more than one-third (36%)--said they didn't know/it depends. Half of respondents said either two (30%) or three (20%). No respondents in this survey said this debate had too many moderators.

Debate Content

The moderators were fair and asked the right questions. A convincing 81% of respondents agreed the moderators were fair to all candidates. A slightly smaller share—but still a majority (64%) agreed the moderators asked the right questions. Not everyone was entirely satisfied, though. Some craved more depth. "I would have like to have seen more follow up questions," said one.
There wasn't a clear winner in the debate. Respondents overwhelmingly disagreed (58%) or didn't know (24%) if there was a clear winner in this debate.
The debate didn't change many listeners' feelings about the candidates. Less than one in five candidates (17%) agreed the debate changed their feeling(s) about one or more candidate(s).

Listening

Less than one-quarter of respondents heard the entire debate. Given its early afternoon timeslot (2 PM - 4 PM EST), some listeners merely caught fragments of the debate while working or running early afternoon errands.
Still, a majority of respondents (68%) heard at least one hour.
Those who listened at work were more likely than those who listened at home or in a car/in transit to hear all two hours.

Election Coverage

Some people don't care about the Iowa caucuses. We've heard this before, and respondents in this survey took yet another opportunity to express their disinterest in the Iowa caucuses. "The media extremely overstate the importance of the Iowa caucuses. . . Iowa is not representative of the general electorate, but is given far too much attention," explained one.
About one in four respondents (23%) said the Iowa caucuses were very important to them, while nearly half (46%) disagreed.
Election fatigue is here already. In an early September survey on the NPR Listens panel, one-quarter of respondents (28%) said there was "a little too much" or "way too much" election coverage on NPR as of the day they completed the survey. Some respondents in this survey mentioned they were "overloaded" and "debated out." Said one, "If you want me to be at all interested by the time next November rolls around, you might want to scale back your coverage." Several others echoed this recommendation. Meanwhile, many panelists expressed their desire to hear from the presidential candidates in greater depth, hoping to better understand their positions on the issues.
More than two-thirds of respondents said they'll likely listen to the NPR Republican presidential candidates’ debate.

Please direct any questions about this survey to Daniel Peters of NPR Audience Insight & Research.

NPR | Audience Insight and Research
NPR/Iowa Public Radio Post-Debate Survey
December 18, 2007