I'd like to understand the money end of debates. Do they cost or earn the party money?

[mahina]

Haven't been able to find much information on this point. It seems like some candidates on the R side are in the game to raise funds. Not so for our guys. But what about the parties? Do we pay the hosting networks, or share in any revenue?

I'd like to find some rational reason for DWS to shut down the debates.

[Renew Deal]

1. Great question

And I don't know the answer. Are the economics similar to other TV shows? Who is respossible for covering the networks expenses?

I don't think the lack of debates is because of money.

[Eric J in MN]

2. I don't think that any money is exchanged between CNN etc and the DNC.

A network will broadcast a debate if it thinks the commercials will make it money.

They don't need to be paid by the DNC or to pay the DNC.

[brooklynite]

3. A payment beyond the operating costs would be considered a campaign contribution...

...which corporations are not allowed to make.

http://www.fec.gov/info/contriblimitschart1516.pdf

[Nonhlanhla]

4. I don't think money is the issue

The real reason for limiting primary debates is because it actually often serves to damage the eventual nominee (no matter who it is). It does so in two ways: it could potentially provide soundbites on video that can be used against the nominee in the general; and, related to that, primaries tend to play to the base, but that the general needs to play to a broader audience.

At least that's what I read online the other day. It makes sense. The GOP also limited their primary debates a bit this year, although they obviously have ore. But they also have a million candidates to sift through.