Dr. Robert J. Sweeney presents Wright State University's approach to the first presidential debate of 2016. (Photo credit VT Staff)
REPORTING FROM CINCINNATI — Executive Vice President for Planning and Secretary to the Board of Trustees Dr. Robert J. Sweeney and Jim Brown, executive director of the Ervin J. Nutter Center at Wright State University, have a historic undertaking on their hands.
After successfully bidding for the first presidential debate of 2016, their school will host upwards of 5,000 members of the media, 6,000 in-person debate viewers, and a host of security forces, including an undisclosed host of Secret Service members, Sept. 26, 2016 at the campus’ Nutter Center.
The date, marking the 56th anniversary of the first televised presidential debate between John F. Kennedy and Richard M. Nixon, Sept. 26, 1960, has its share of challenges. But during their presentation on this tremendous undertaking, both Sweeney and Brown discussed the people and elements they have working for them at the IAVM Regions 2 & 3 meeting in here May 22-24.
Sweeney himself attributed part of the Nutter Center’s successful bid to their experience as an already-recognized site for political events. After being vetted for visits from President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, and former Presidents George Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush, their application to the Commission on Presidential Debates was approved. The school and the commission have worked closely together since then, according to Sweeney, while also building a 501(c)3 group of their own to research best practices on how to host an event of this magnitude.
(From left) Dr. Robert J. Sweeney and Jim Brown (Photo credit VT Staff)
2016’s “somewhat electric” primary season, according to Sweeney, has brought its own particular challenges. Wright State University was told by the Commission on Presidential Debates to expect between 3,000-4,000 media. But even as early as March, Sweeney said the campus saw 3,300 inquiries for media passes, going on to state that the campus expects more than 5,000 members of the media at the facility.
With as much media as they will have, Sweeney said the primary audience will be a world-size one, not the 6,000 in-person attendees.
“We are building a TV studio,” said Sweeney, one from which an expected 400 million people may be watching the debate worldwide. Sweeney said that usually around 100 million are expected, but this year’s season has drawn even more attention than usual.
With all of the adjustments that have to be made to the campus for added security, including a temporary fence that will encapsulate the center in an area under the exclusive control of the Secret Service, Sweeney said an original estimate of $3-$5 million was made for hosting the debate. This would include routine maintenance and upgrades to the facility that would last beyond the debate. The budget has since been increased to $8 million for cyber security. The pricetag has its benefits, though, since it will include lasting improvements like better WiFi capabilities and better computer infrastructure.
“For us, for the money that we’re going to spend on the debate, and we’re going to get 400 million eyeballs on the university, we’re never going to get that kind of ROI on a marketed event,” said Sweeney. Executive Director of the Nutter Center Jim Brown shared that 60 million people visited their website within a matter of weeks after the announcement was made that Wright State University would host the event, which was a huge win for the school.
However, some big decisions are still yet to be made as of late May.
The final format for the debate, either at podiums, a table with the moderator in the middle, or a town-hall approach, has not been agreed upon yet. This is an especially important design feature since it determines the placement of the candidates, and impacts seating, as well and the configuration of the arena.
Sweeney shared that the “money shot,” or the shot of the debate that will be seen by viewers first, has been moved from one side of the building to the other. This changes where generators are placed, stand-ups, etc. While these kinds of changes can change the plans time and again, Sweeney said that changes are becoming less plentiful with each visit by the commission.
Free speech areas (formerly known as protest areas) are required on state-owned properties. With the sometimes-violent atmosphere around this year’s presidential race, Sweeney said that the university is being encouraged to build an area on par with football-field dimensions, instead of the usual basketball-court sized zone.
Brown said that no resources would go unused to ensure security. “It’s going to be all hands on deck,” Brown said, with Secret Service magnetometers acting within the perimeter, and everyone from the FBI to local sheriff and police departments operating outside.
“Whatever law enforcement you can think of, it’s going to be there,” said Brown. He added that the close proximity of the Wright-Patterson Air Force Base would mean security drones would be on patrol in the air above the campus as well.
Even with all of the preparations and money poured into the debate already, Sweeney made it clear that there are still no guarantees that both parties will attend the debate (or that there will be two of them, as Sweeney said they are prepared for at least two).
“I caution you, there is no guarantee, there is no commitment from either party that they’re actually going to debate,” said Sweeney. “We’re sort of betting on this.”
He said that there is insurance in place through the campus’ risk management staff, should this worst-case scenario play out.
Whatever the risk, Sweeney was confident of the value that a follow-through Sept. 26 would bring. He hoped this would be the first of many debates, should the commission be impressed. Sweeney also hoped the community will see the advantages in having these debates and the exposure it would bring to the school.
“We’re really looking at this as a community-building opportunity to really promote more broadly,” Sweeney said. He added that the value of the first presidential debate would stand in welcome contrast to the essence of the primary season.
“There’s such a marked difference between the primary season and the election season,” said Sweeney. “I really believe, as a country, there’s a certain amount of awareness building that we have to make an informed decision. We really believe that the debates, through time, have proven to be integral.”
Interviewed for this article: Robert J. Sweeney, (937) 775-3346; Jim Brown, (937) 775-4670