Public forum debate is yet another form of debate presided over by a judge. The way that public forum debate differs from more structured debate styles, such as LD and parliamentary debate, is that debate teams do not know on which side of the argument they will be speaking. This aspect of public forum debate requires thorough and in-depth research.

The topics discussed in public forum debate are often contemporary, controversial topics. Due to the subject matter of these topics, much of the research toward building and understanding the topic of a public forum debate case will be conducted on the Internet, using current publications and news sources. The Internet is also a good source for providing information for both sides of the argument at hand.

The Judge Rules A Public Forum Debate

Since a judge presides over and decides the winner of a public forum debate, there are time constraints to be aware of when formulating speeches and arguments. It is a good idea to narrow your case down to a few key points that will remain in the judge's mind when he or she decides the victor. Competitors will each have two opportunities to speak in support of their position. A team member could be chosen to give the opening speech and subsequent summary, or a secondary speech and final summary in which they restate the main point of their argument.

An interesting and entertaining component of public forum debate is the grand cross-fire, conducted sitting down, where both members of each debate question and attack each other's points. Afterwards, each team has one minute to restate the main point of their argument. We do not often see this with the older debate styles. The topics discussed in and the formats of public forum debate makes it a very entertaining exchange of words and ideas.