It seems to be a problem with any televised debate - the people debating have no intention of finding the truth or changing their mind, instead it’s all about convincing the viewer by appearing to be “winning” the argument.

It's a common failing of philosophy. Many philosophers constantly reframe everything they hear and see as exemplifying and justifying their own view, and seem to be unable to engage anyone else on their own terms or even charitably see the point others who don't agree with them are trying to make.

This goes double for when the conversation is across the Analytic/Continental divide, as is the case with the Chomsky/Foucault debate (though Chosmky isn't exactly an Analytic philosopher, he's a lot closer to the Analytics than he is to the Continentals).