Has Big Tech become too powerful? Amazon, Apple, Alphabet, Meta, and Microsoft shape how we shop, communicate, and consume information. But has their dominance gone too far? Advocates argue these firms are monopolies that harm competition, exploit consumer data, and wield disproportionate influence over public discourse. Structural reforms would restore fairness and innovation. But critics warn that breakups could damage user experience, slow innovation, and disrupt integrated ecosystems people rely on. Now we debate: Should the U.S. Government Break Up Big Tech?

Arguing Yes:  

Bharat Ramamurti, Founder of The Bully Pulpit; Former Deputy Director of the National Economic Council  

Matt Stoller, Director of Research at the American Economic Liberties Project  

Arguing No:  

Geoffrey A. Manne, President and Founder of the International Center for Law & Economics 

Jennifer Huddleston, Senior Fellow in Technology Policy at the Cato Institute 

Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates 

This debate was produced in partnership with the SNF Agora Institute at Johns Hopkins University, as part of The Hopkins Forum series. It was recorded in front of a live audience on Thursday, December 4, 2025 at the Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg Center.

Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates.  

Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. 

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

What does it take to moderate a debate? How do we keep conversations civil when the world feels so polarized? In celebration of our launch on Substack, moderator-in-chief John Donvan joins Nayeema Raza and Reason’s Nick Gillespie for a lively conversation on the craft of moderation and the art of asking questions that reveal rather than inflame. Featuring audience Q&A and behind-the-scenes insight, this episode offers a candid look at how meaningful dialogue is created today. 

Our Guests:  

John Donvan, Open to Debate's Moderator-in-Chief and Emmy award-winning journalist 

Nayeema Raza, Journalist and Host of "Smart Girl Dumb Questions" 

Nick Gillespie, Editor-at-Large at Reason 

Debates Referenced During this Inside Edition 

13:03 - Should America End Birthright Citizenship? 
19:22 - Is It Time To Break Up With Dating Apps? 
20:34 - Replace Private Insurance with Medicare for All 
20:38 - Should We Legalize Drugs? 
20:41 - Preserve Net Neutrality: All Data Is Created Equal 
21:14 - Is America Too Obsessed With Race? 
27:04 - Is the American Dream in Decline? 
28:35 - The Universal Basic Income Is The Safety Net Of The Future 

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Effective altruism is a philosophical and social movement that uses empirical data to maximize the impact of charitable efforts. Those who champion EA praise its methodological framework for maximizing the effectiveness of donations, thus ensuring equal consideration for all individuals. Those who challenge EA argue that its emphasis on measurable outcomes may overlook important yet hard-to-quantify causes, potentially restricting the scope of what's considered beneficial. Now we debate: Does the Effective Altruism Movement Get Giving Right? 

Arguing Yes: Peter Singer, Author of “The Most Good You Can Do”; Philosopher and Emeritus Professor of Bioethics at the University Center for Human Values at Princeton University  

Arguing No: Alice Crary, Co-Editor of “The Good it Promises, The Harm it Does: Critical Essays on Effective Altruism”; University Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at The New School for Social Research 

Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates 

Visit our Substack to watch more insightful debates and subscribe to our newsletter.  

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

he Trump administration is taking the War on Drugs in a bold direction, using aircraft carriers, intelligence networks, and direct military strikes to target alleged smuggling vessels in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific. Supporters of militarization argue that previous strategies to stop cartels have failed, and only aggressive deterrence will stop the crisis. Others warn that militarization usually fails to stop drug flows, risking civilian casualties, and rarely achieves lasting results. Now we debate: Should the U.S. Militarize the War on Drugs? 

Arguing Yes: 

Sean McFate, Author and Professor of Strategy at the National Defense University and Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service 

Andrés Martínez-Fernández, Senior Policy Analyst for Latin America at The Heritage Foundation's Allison Center for National Security 

Arguing No:  

Will Freeman, Fellow for Latin America Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations 

Aileen Teague, Assistant Professor of International Affairs at Texas A&M University's Bush School of Government and Public Service 

Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates 

Visit our Substack to watch more insightful debates and subscribe to our newsletter.  

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

We are pleased to share an episode from the Clearer Thinking Podcast featuring Open to Debate Founder Robert Rosenkranz in conversation with Spencer Greenberg.

About this episode:

What makes a forum truly open-minded rather than performative? When does listening change minds instead of just hardening identities? Are we teaching citizens to separate facts from frames? Do the best debates surface values as well as evidence? How can we reward calm argument over outrage economics? What reforms reduce polarization without dulling real disagreement? Should any topic be off-limits in a free society? Is philanthropy giving back—or building what’s missing? Should generosity optimize impact or express the values we want to grow? How much risk is acceptable when the upside is transformative?

Robert Rosenkranz is a dedicated philanthropist, an advocate for intellectual engagement, and respected commentator on philanthropy. He founded Delphi Capital Management and championed the renowned Open to Debate debate series. Robert’s latest book, The Stoic Capitalist, explores the intersection of ancient Stoic wisdom and modern capitalism. When he’s not crafting ideas, Robert dedicates his time to supporting the arts, advancing education, and contributing to public policy through The Rosenkranz Foundation.

Learn more about the Clearer Thinking podcast here.

Visit our Open to Debate Substack to watch more insightful debates and subscribe to our newsletter. To learn more about our mission and donate, visit Opentodebate.org.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

How big is the divide between different age groups? In this inaugural episode of a new Open to Debate series, “Generational Divides,” Reason’s editor-at-large Nick Gillespie brings together a Baby Boomer, a Gen X-er, and a Gen Z-er to discuss Social Security benefits and how they’ll affect future generations, homeownership, and 1950s nostalgia, where they examine the cultural and economic shifts occurring around intergenerational wealth and how each generation views money, opportunity, and the American Dream. 

Our Guests: 

For Baby Boomers: Joe Nocera, Deputy Managing Editor at The Free Press 

For Gen X: Stacey Vanek Smith, Journalist and Reporter; Co-host of "Everybody's Business" at Bloomberg Business  

For Gen Z: Kyla Scanlon, Financial Content Creator, Economic Commentator and Author of "In This Economy?" 

Nick Gillespie, Editor-at-Large at Reason, is the guest moderator. 

Visit our Substack to watch more insightful debates and subscribe to our newsletter.  

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The U.S. and China are the two largest competitors in the race for semiconductors and in creating the most powerful AI chips. Europe could become a major stakeholder thanks to its demand for tech sovereignty and lithography near-monopoly, while others see the continent as too hampered by regulation, labor, and limited venture capital to get ahead. Now, in partnership with Bloomberg, we debate: Is Europe Too Late to Compete in the Chip Wars?

Arguing "Too Late":  

 Zach Meyers, Director of Research at the Centre on Regulation in Europe (CERRE) 

Geoffrey Gertz, Former Director for International Economics at the White House; Senior Fellow at the Center for a New American Security  

Arguing "Not Too Late: 

Cristina Caffarra, Economist & Co-founder of EuroStack 

Eric Baissus, CEO of Kalray 

Caroline Hyde, Bloomberg Television Anchor and Host of “Bloomberg Technology”, is the guest moderator. 

Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates.  

Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. 

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

At a time when misinformation thrives, institutions crumble, and algorithms mediate truth, trust has become one of democracy’s most fragile foundations. Our team at Open to Debate has been thinking twice recently about trust — how it’s earned, how it breaks, and how it might be rebuilt between one another in a time of deep division. Jimmy Wales, the founder of Wikipedia, the Internet’s encyclopedia with an English-language version that has been viewed 11 billion times alone and allows anyone to contribute and edit a page, says that trust is a living treasure that can and must be cultivated. In this episode, geopolitical strategist and Wickett Advisory moderator Xenia Wickett sits down with Jimmy Wales to discuss his new book, "The Seven Rules of Trust: A Blueprint for Building Things That Last.” In this "Think Twice" episode, the interview explores how Wikipedia leveraged trust to help it become a global authority while the public’s trust in other institutions has faded. 

Our Guest: Jimmy Wales, Founder of Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Foundation; Author of "The Seven Rules of Trust: A Blueprint for Building Things That Last" 

Xenia Wickett, Geopolitical strategist, moderator at Wickett Advisory, and Trustee of Transparency International UK, is the guest moderator. 

Substack: https://opentodebate.substack.com/ 

Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates.  

Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. 

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Birthright citizenship guarantees citizenship to anyone born within the United States’ territory, regardless of a parent’s nationality. But should this legal principle be removed from the Constitution? Those arguing it shouldn’t say that it prevents children from being punished for their parents’ status, while encouraging long-term economic and civic contributions. But those calling to end the practice argue it fuels illegal immigration and strains the overburdened immigration system. Now, we debate: Should America End Birthright Citizenship? 

This debate was recorded on October 9, 2025 at 1 PM at the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication at Arizona State University in Phoenix, AZ. 

This event is part of a new partnership between Open to Debate and Arizona State University’s Institute of Politics to bring live debate programming to ASU’s campus in a special series titled PRO/CONversations. Produced by Arizona PBS in the Arizona State University Media Enterprise—which will air and promote the recorded programs—the series is designed to model civil discourse for students while offering hands-on production experience to ASU journalism students. 

 Arguing Yes:  

Mark Krikorian, Executive Director of the Center for Immigration Studies 

Horace Cooper, Senior Fellow at the National Center for Public Policy Research; Chairman of the Project 21 National Advisory Board 

Arguing No:  

Kris Mayes, Arizona Attorney General 

Chris Newman, Legal Director of the National Day Laborer Organizing Network (NDLON) 

Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates 

Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates.  

Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. 

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Today, humanity is thriving, but there are fears the good times will not last. Will tomorrow be better than today? Those arguing “yes” say people have better access to resources and technological advances are making us more prosperous. Those arguing “no” say there are widening socio-economic disparities, our globalized world is bound to collapse, and we’re not doing enough to fight climate change. Now we debate: Will the Future Be Abundant? 

Arguing Yes: Peter Diamandis, Founder and Executive Chairman of the XPRIZE Foundation   

Arguing No: Peter Zeihan, Geopolitical Strategist 

Xenia Wickett, Geopolitical strategist and moderator at Wickett Advisory and Trustee of Transparency International UK, is the guest moderator. 

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

From ancient battles to modern proxy wars, conflicts have been a constant in human history. But does that mean we are destined to continue treating it as an option? Those saying war is inevitable argue that our global system is anarchic and no overarching authority exists to stop war, so states prioritize survival and power. But others argue that conflict is not the only form of dispute resolution; trade, diplomacy, international law, mediation, and peace treaties can avert war. Now we debate: Is War Inevitable? 

Arguing Yes: Dylan Motin, Visiting Scholar at the Seoul National University Asia Center 

Arguing No: Gabrielle Rifkind, Conflict Mediator; Director of Oxford Process 

Emmy award-winning journalist John Donvan moderates 

Visit OpentoDebate.org to watch more insightful debates.  

Subscribe to our newsletter to stay informed on our curated weekly debates, dynamic live events, and educational initiatives. 

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices