Watch "Etiquette" Question

Posts
2,361
Likes
12,685
This is not a debate about politics. Please do not take it in that direction.

I am watching the US presidential debate. I just noticed a peculiar thing....

The moderators (Anderson Cooper & Martha Raddatz) have taken their watches off and placed them on the table next to them. Is there some sort of political/TV etiquette that suggests they do this? Or is it just so they can look at the time without looking at their wrists?
 
Posts
6,713
Likes
18,562
Never heard of any relevant etiquette. I suspect they just want to keep track of the time.
 
Posts
1,926
Likes
3,521
I think they are just using them as timers for the 2 minutes each candidate is allowed.
Politics aside, it sure is good TV.
 
Posts
2,361
Likes
12,685
I think they are just using them as timers for the 2 minutes each candidate is allowed.
Politics aside, it sure is good TV.
As entertaining as it is.... I'm more interested in what watches are on the table😎
 
Posts
13,034
Likes
51,978
I do that in meetings occasionally to keep things on track.
 
Posts
17,609
Likes
26,711
My bet is so they can lol at the time and keep it on track without looking at their watches.
 
Posts
17,609
Likes
26,711
My bet is so they can lol at the time and keep it on track without looking at their watches.
I like that typo actually
 
Posts
11,745
Likes
37,961
Well, those two black cutouts in the table right in front of the watches contained timers counting down each candidate's 2 minutes, so I'd imagine they might have done so to be able to see the time without looking at their wrists
 
Posts
2,056
Likes
14,500
I do that in meetings occasionally to keep things on track.

Me too ...


"You see this watch ? This watch is worth more than your car! " 😁

 
Posts
1,882
Likes
8,099
BTW any information about the exact models of the watches placed on table?
 
Posts
13,034
Likes
51,978
No, I was too busy watching the lowest point of our glorious republics history to care about watches.
 
Posts
241
Likes
505
My bet is so they can lol at the time and keep it on track without looking at their watches.
+1 Might look a little suspect if Anderson looks down at his wrist when Trump elaborates on p^$$y grabbing loll
 
Posts
3,719
Likes
4,200
Probably not etiquette, but practical:
1 - you don't want to be seen looking at your wrist
2 - its probably more comfortable in a high-stress environment.
 
Posts
119
Likes
195
Probably not etiquette, but practical:
1 - you don't want to be seen looking at your wrist
2 - its probably more comfortable in a high-stress environment.

I think you're right about comfort. Wouldn't it be hot on stage and make a watch uncomfortable to wear?
 
Posts
3,719
Likes
4,200
I think you're right about comfort. Wouldn't it be hot on stage and make a watch uncomfortable to wear?
Not sure about the stage (candidates probably want it very cold, so we don't see them sweat). But lots of uncomfortable situations for both candidates and moderators

Trump_Debate_Stalk_rtr_img.jpeg
 
Posts
2,675
Likes
7,487
Over the years I have seen several people with a habit of taking off their watch and placing in front of them for meetings.

I always thought this was a way of making a strong visual statement that:
1. Their time was now dedicated to the task at hand
2. Their time would be monitored and managed.

I fail to see how a <50mm dial is easier to see on a table in front of you than on your wrist. I also don't believe picking it up occasionally off the table to check time is less subtle than glancing at your wrist.

I suspect the debate moderators were subtly signaling something like my 2 points above, and also maybe did so somewhat out of habit...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Posts
2,502
Likes
3,515
IMHO they are both silently acknowledging what an amazingly huge waste of everyone's time the debates really are.
 
Posts
13,034
Likes
51,978
You do this in a meeting with a hard stop and decisions to be made. Sends a strong signal that there is a time limit and the meeting has to accomplish something.
 
Posts
1,882
Likes
8,099
You do this in a meeting with a hard stop and decisions to be made. Sends a strong signal that there is a time limit and the meeting has to accomplish something.
I doubt that was the case there. Even moderators too never expected anything to accomplish there!