On September, 21, 2011, a game on behalf of the St.-Petersburg federation of debates was held in the context of the international student conference the Baltic PR Weekend 2011 with support of Northwest branch of OJSC “MegaFon”.
he event took place in the youth house of the Vassileostrovsky district at 65, Bolshoy Av.,V. O. The conference was attended by over 200 students of the city’s largest higher educational institutions specializing in public relations.
Participants of the exhibition game “Debates” included students of the following higher educational institutions: the Herzen State Pedagogical University of Russia, the St.-Petersburg State University, the Polytechnic University. The debated topic was relevant and rather controversial. Debates were dedicated to the bill concerning ban on alcohol sponsorship of sport events.
The jury of debates included the following persons:
- Aleksandr Yevgenyevich Tsypkin, public relations director of Northwest branch of OJSC “MegaFon”.
- Sergey Leonidovich Syrov, Director General of “Sport Ekspress” in St.-Petersburg.
- Vyacheslav Sergeevich Burtsev, commercial director of “Zenit” broadcasting company.
- Dmitry Yurievich Puchkov aka Goblin, Russian translator, author of 6 parody translations of Hollywood films, writer, publicist, blogger, and game developer.
- Yury Igorevich Nesterov, Soviet handballer, the honored master of sports of the USSR, Olympic Gold Medalist in 1988, World Silver Medalist in 1990.
- Sergey Nikolaevich Belkov, head of the office of the director general of ZAO “Futbolny klub Zenit”.
- Aleksander Nikolaev, chairman of the St-Petersburg Committee for Youth Policy and Cooperation with Public Organisations.
- Andrei Mikonin, partner of the legal firm S&K Vertikal.
The game was held in the American format: the 2 teams of 3 persons defended the opposite notions. Speakers of both teams brought forward arguments, protected their own points of view and reasoned the audience into taking their side.
All the speakers having detailed their position, the jury announced the results, and the names of winners. Participants were assessed not depending of position they adhered to (after all, the “view” of a team was assigned by lot), but rather depending of the way they presented their “views”, and of arguments brought forward by them, and of how logical their case was.
Each juror voiced their point of view related to the discussed topic, moreover, they explained, why they decided to award victory to this particular team. The opposition team was awarded victory by a majority of vote.
For a video report оn debates at PR-Weekend, see here