Candidates skip traditional political forums ahead of North Carolina elections

In the run-up to the closely-watched elections in North Carolina, political forums designed to offer voters insights into candidates’ positions have encountered a troubling trend—candidates, particularly Republican incumbents, are increasingly opting out of these events, leaving empty chairs and unanswered questions.

The forums, organized by a consortium of media outlets including WHQR, Port City Daily, and WECT, are traditionally held at Cape Fear Community College. These forums, scheduled ahead of the local and North Carolina General Assembly races, have long been a staple for voters seeking to understand candidate positions on critical issues. However, noticeable absences have sparked concern over the level of engagement from those running for public office.

On October 2, during a forum for New Hanover County commissioner candidates, incumbent Republicans Dane Scalise and Bill Rivenbark were unexpectedly absent. Rivenbark had initially confirmed attendance but did not appear, citing a wary relationship with the media as a potential reason. This absence of dialogue follows a broader national trend where candidates increasingly favour controlled messaging through their channels and selective media engagements.

This decline in participation is reflective of a distrust in media outlets generally perceived to be partisan. Recent Gallup polling highlighted that only 31% of Americans currently trust media, and this skepticism is markedly higher among Republican affiliates. Despite these challenges, local journalism seems to fare better in trust compared to national news.

Media forums are not only an avenue for the public to hear candidates but also serve the journalistic duty of scrutinising candidates’ records and intentions. Yet, events such as these have faced resistance, mirroring a national tendency where forums and debates are forgone in favour of social media narratives and ads.

This shift is further emphasized by the strategic decisions made by political campaigns. GOP strategist Paul Shumaker notes that attendance at forums often hinges on whether they align with a candidate’s strategic interests. According to Shumaker, candidates are more inclined to respond to organizations that could directly influence their campaign’s trajectory, such as those with fundraising potential or strong ideological alignment.

The skepticism towards forums is not isolated to New Hanover County. Similar resistance has been noted in Brunswick County, where Republican candidates declined participation in a forum organized by the Brunswick Beacon, despite collaborative efforts with local party chairs to encourage attendance.

The reluctance appears to be strategic, as participation could grant additional visibility to opponents or expose vulnerabilities through unscripted interactions. An incident in Southport, organized by Southport NC Indivisibles-Stepping Forward, saw mostly Democratic candidates in attendance, reflecting this divide.

The reluctance to engage with media forums poses significant questions about the nature of political discourse and its implications for democracy. These forums historically serve as vital platforms for the electorate to gauge candidates’ stances on pivotal local issues, such as overdevelopment, infrastructure planning, and the pace of regional growth.

While digital media and direct voter outreach have become primary channels for candidates, the traditional role of journalistic forums in fostering informed public debate remains crucial. Nevertheless, as campaigns lean more heavily on targeted, data-driven strategies, this shift away from open public dialogue underscores the evolving landscape of political communication and the challenges inherent in navigating it.

Source: Noah Wire Services