Social Question

SQUEEKY2's avatar

When it comes to Political debates, should the moderator be able to mute a candidates mic?

Asked by SQUEEKY2 (19165points) 3 weeks ago

This goes for both sides.
If a Candidate breaks the rules, won’t let his opponent speak, holds the floor hostage.
Keeps interrupting, or shouting.
Should the Moderator be able to mute his mic?
If no, then why not?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

12 Answers

cheebdragon's avatar

Fair play would require a truly unbiased moderator.

SQUEEKY2's avatar

You are a snarky one, what is so hard about following the rules of the debate?
If it is your opponents turn to have the floor for 2 minutes uninterrupted and you keep butting in with this or that you should be muted end of story.
And a Fox News anchor as Moderator bet he is more right than left.

hmmmmmm's avatar

@cheebdragon: “Fair play would require a truly unbiased moderator.”

Adorable

cheebdragon's avatar

@SQUEEKY2 Funny, because I never said which party Wallace was showing bias towards.

SQUEEKY2's avatar

Gee, even a dumb Dem/lib could figure out who a Fox anchor would be for.

filmfann's avatar

Absolutely.
Also, the debaters should have their speaking time measured.
If a candidate goes over his allowed time, the other candidates should be given an equal amount of uninterrupted time at the conclusion.

filmfann's avatar

Plus, shock collars!

LuckyGuy's avatar

I’m so old remember when opponents were respectful and followed the rules. It is too has that a certain person forced this type of action.

To answer your question, Yes!
I would make 3 changes:
1) A timer should automatically mute the non-speaking participant. The muting should be automatic so no one can claim the moderator is biased.
2) If the non-speaking participant makes noise in any way, such as: huffing, pounding the table, booing, name calling, etc. a red light will flash on their console to indicate the infraction. Their rebuttal time will be reduced by 10 seconds for each infraction.
3) The cameras should only show the speaking participant and ignore the opponent.

All of the above actions can be performed automatically. (I’ll make the system that does it if they cannot find a source.).

I’d like to add a 4th rule that penalizes opponents for unmannerly actions such as: name calling, cursing, temper tantrums, immature antics but that would require a moderator with backbone and would bring in the question of bias.

ragingloli's avatar

I am for an automatic timer connected to a shock collar with taser-level output, that is automatically triggered when it picks up sound from the microphone.

stanleybmanly's avatar

I think Trump would never put up with any sort of muzzle. And I don’t believe he should be forced (or allowed) to flaunt his disabilities. Any debate involving the man is a hopeless fraud. It’s the hype behind the promise of a cockfight when the reality at best must be to he equivalent of mud wrestling.

gorillapaws's avatar

I think maybe it could be automated so the mics automatically shut off. Basically, they have x amount of time for each question/response based on the rules with a timer that ticks down. Only one candidate’s mic is active at any time. When it hits 0 their mic cuts off. The debater can press a button to activate his/her bonus time to reactivate their mic. Maybe each candidate has 8 extra minutes they can use at their discretion (so they can use all of it on the first question and not have any buffer later or reserve to the end). Any remaining time could be added to the candidate’s closing remarks.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther