In an age of hyper-partisan debates, PBS offers a fresh take on civil discourse with Deadlock, a new debate series premiering on September 20th. This show confronts real-world ethical dilemmas through thought-provoking hypothetical scenarios, pushing panelists and viewers alike to grapple with tough choices and moral complexities. Moderated by Aaron Tang, a law professor at UC Davis, Deadlock sets out to bridge ideological divides and challenge its audience to move beyond entrenched beliefs toward more nuanced conversations.
(Rob Latour/Shutterstock for Television Critics Association)
Deadlock differentiates itself from other political discourses by centering its discussions on hypothetical situations rather than direct real-world controversies. In each episode, a diverse panel of experts is presented with a scenario they’ve never seen before, and they must navigate it in real time. The hypothetical approach frees the participants from the pressures of discussing current events directly. It allows them to reflect on moral and ethical questions without the baggage of real-world politics.
According to Aaron Tang, this approach aims to combat the oversimplification in today’s public debates. “The honest answers are nuanced and complex,” Tang explained during a TCA press conference. “Our goal is to spark open-mindedness and help people find the middle ground instead of retreating to our usual corners.”
To facilitate these conversations, Deadlock assembles a distinguished group of panelists drawn from different sectors of society, including politics, academia, media, and law. The premiere episode features an eclectic mix, including Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, political strategist Dr. Rachel Bitecofer, Princeton professor Dr. Eddie S. Glaude, Jr., and former U.S. Representative Mick Mulvaney. Executive Producer Andrew Lack emphasizes the importance of each panel’s diversity. “We hope it will humanize the conversation on important topics, explore areas of common ground, and facilitate a deeper understanding of diverse perspectives,” he said. By avoiding the typical media formula of pitting pundits against one another, Deadlock seeks to cultivate a space where panelists, and by extension, the viewers, can engage thoughtfully with opposing viewpoints.
As the moderator, Aaron Tang plays a pivotal role in guiding these complex discussions. His background as a law professor and former clerk for Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor provides him with the skill set needed to navigate challenging conversations. Tang likens his role to that of a conductor, orchestrating the flow of dialogue among the panelists while maintaining focus on the evolving narrative of the hypothetical scenario. Describing his moderating style as “reality improv,” Tang relishes the unpredictability that comes with the panelists learning the scenario on the spot. His goal is not to force a conclusion but to foster a dialogue that allows different perspectives to emerge naturally. “Our job is not to make up anybody’s mind but to open minds,” Tang said. The format gives panelists the freedom to be candid, and Tang’s role is to ensure the conversation stays dynamic and relevant.
The premiere episode of Deadlock is centered around a particularly timely issue: the ethics surrounding elections. While the exact details of the scenario are kept secret until the taping, viewers can expect the discussion to touch on the moral and legal dilemmas that arise in the context of modern electoral politics. The episode will be introduced by Supreme Court Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Amy Coney Barrett, setting a tone of serious reflection on the role of elections in American democracy. As the scenario unfolds, the panelists will be forced to confront difficult decisions that mimic real-world electoral challenges, prompting both the participants and the audience to ask themselves, “What would I do?” Tang believes that by putting panelists in these high-stakes situations, the show can offer insights into how we, as a society, might navigate similar ethical challenges in real life. The emphasis on elections is particularly relevant in today’s political climate, where trust in the electoral process has become a divisive issue.
The scenarios themselves are crafted with care and precision, thanks to the efforts of Joan Greco, who leads the writing team. Each hypothetical is designed to reflect the complexity of real-world issues, challenging the panelists to think beyond binary choices. As Tang explains, the goal is to present the panelists with “hard choices” that they must grapple with in real time, adding a layer of unpredictability to the show. The production process also includes rehearsals, though not with the panelists. Tang works closely with the production team to ensure that the hypothetical narrative flows smoothly, but once the cameras roll, it’s all about capturing the spontaneous reactions of the panelists as they encounter the ethical dilemmas for the first time. This method keeps the conversation fresh and authentic, providing a genuine reflection of how people react when faced with tough moral decisions.
For viewers, Deadlock offers more than just an entertaining hour of television. It invites them to engage with the ethical questions posed by the hypothetical scenarios and consider how they might respond in similar situations. Tang hopes that the show will resonate particularly with younger viewers, who are often disillusioned by the polarizing nature of today’s media landscape. “My hypothesis is that many well-meaning young people crave nuance and complexity,” Tang said. “They might laugh at the TikTok video, but they’re hungry for an honest discussion.” This desire for deeper engagement is reflected in Deadlock’s approach. Rather than offering easy answers, the show encourages critical thinking and introspection. As the panelists wrestle with the ethical dilemmas, viewers at home are prompted to do the same, making Deadlock a conversation starter that extends beyond the screen.
“As viewers grow weary of 'winner/loser' debates, Deadlock offers a refreshing alternative,” Andrew Lack concluded. In a media environment dominated by quick soundbites and adversarial debates, Deadlock offers a refreshing alternative. By focusing on hypothetical scenarios and fostering thoughtful discussion, the show provides a space for civil discourse that is sorely needed in today’s polarized world. For anyone looking for a more nuanced exploration of the ethical dilemmas we face as a society, Deadlock is a must-watch.
Tune in on September 20th (check local listings for local times) or stream the episode on PBS.org and the PBS app to join the conversation and explore the real-world implications of Deadlock’s hypothetical scenarios.