We are all aware about the penchant for publicity on the part of our politicians, like fussing over trivial, rather than principal, matters. They, for example, would put procedure behind substance and prefer cover over content.

Many would suspect the heating prelude to the first presidential debate may camouflage the reality that neither camp is ready for the showdown, which will be aired live. But whether the incumbent President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo and his running mate Ma’ruf Amin and the contending pair of Prabowo Subianto and Sandiaga Uno are prepared or not, the debate is very much awaited.

First and foremost, much of the electorate, which totals at least 193 million, is not yet familiar with the campaign platforms of the two tickets, although such documents are available on the KPU website. A recent survey by Kompas found that only 33 percent of the respondents were adequately exposed to information about the two pairs, while two-thirds of the respondents claimed to know only general information about the candidates. Worse, more than 60 percent of the respondents do not know about the campaign platforms of the candidates.

The outcome of the survey should serve as a warning for both campaign teams to intensify their efforts to help the voters to better understand their platforms. Indonesia cannot afford to elect the wrong persons, or those whose platforms smack of a hidden agenda that favors their own or their group’s interests.

The presidential debate is one of the only ways in which voters can get to know the candidates and an opportunity for the candidates to impress voters with their programs and plans of action. Of course, the candidates will talk big, but the way they present their ideas will make a difference, which is why communication skills matter.

All five debates the KPU will organize will put the candidates’ communication skills to the test, not to mention the fact that they will take part in the discussions live. The advantage of a live debate for voters is that it does not allow for editing or any kind of censorship. Any mistake, great or small, like citing incorrect data or loss of temper, will punish the candidates dearly.

We should be glad to have a chance to see candidates for top executive posts exposed to a flurry of questions from both their contenders and a panel of experts. It may be unfair to compare Indonesia’s debates with those of the United States — except for the ones in 2016, perhaps — but they have contributed a lot to educating voters.

The more often debates are held, the better, because they allow voters to exercise common sense. 

The presidential election comes only once every five years, which is too long to endure if we choose the wrong leader.