How do we compel them to debate?

I was listening to the Eric Strauss show on KKOB, link.

The gist was, Strauss would love to have political candidates on his show. He said he doesn't have them on because election law requires equal time and not all candidates were willing to appear on his show.

He said he would like, for example, to have candidates Rep Janice Arnold-Jones and County Commissioner Michelle Lujan Grisham on the show to debate energy.

Moving from specifics to generalities; there is a possibility for candidates to get on radio shows and debate election issues. Strauss claimed Lujan Grisham wouldn't come on his show because he and KKOB share a political philosophy contrary to her own. I wonder why that makes any difference.

In the first place, we need another word to use beside "debate". The debates we've seen and heard are not debates at all, wikilink. Which is not to say the debating under the formal rules would be any more useful than what we are seeing now.

The primary focus of "debates" should be the needs of voters, the need for information and perspectives on issues, and knowledge of the candidates relative abilities to defend their positions in debates with politicians representing contrary interests.

The most fundamental question is; who decides how candidates present themselves before the people? Do candidates get to decide whether to hide behind campaign ads or stand on a stump somewhere, or do the people get to decide?

The obvious answer is the candidates decide and that's why the people will never see them standing up and defending their positions, intentions, and qualifications.