Two letters to the editor in La Tercera criticize the recent Anatel-organized presidential debate for lacking interaction and substance. The authors argue that the candidates' behavior reflects a deficiency in civic education and could discourage voters in the runoff. The event is described as a superficial spectacle rather than a genuine exchange of ideas.
The presidential debate broadcast by Anatel, held on the night of December 8, 2025, has drawn criticism for its deficient format. In a letter, Kênio Estrela, an academic in philosophy of language and linguistics, states: "What happened the night before last was not a debate, because debating requires interaction, reply, and shared sense. There were only parallel emissions, without the minimal 'cooperación conversacional' that any significant speech act demands." Estrela urges citizens to express their will through their vote this Sunday, December 14, as the only binding statement.
Meanwhile, Rodrigo Espinoza Troncoso, director of the School of Public Administration at Universidad Diego Portales, highlights the candidates' worrying behavior: "incessant interruptions, scant seriousness in handling figures, constant provocations, unison interventions, abuse of slogans, evasive responses, and a notable lack of content that makes sense to both technocrats and ordinary citizens." Espinoza Troncoso notes that this lack of civic education affects even elites, turning debates into superficial spectacles, and questions what the youth can learn from such examples. He warns that the scarce content on public policies might reinforce the idea of casting null votes.
Both opinions emphasize the importance of healthy deliberation in democracy, where citizens can learn about candidates' stances. Despite the criticisms, the debate shows no contradictions in reported facts, focusing on form over substance. The runoff election approaches, with free public transport and extended hours in Santiago to facilitate participation.
