I am a young person - Younger actually than the author of this article, and I would never NEVER address someone like Sen. Obama did Sen. McCain.

It has nothing to do with "Gen" anything, and everything to do with manners. My first reaction is to address someone by their title and surname (Mr. Jones, Sen. Johnson, Dr. Jackson), unless in an introduction he/she has said something like "Hi, nice to meet you, I'm John." Which will give me to cue at that point to use first name only.

If it was a generational idiosycracy or culture change, I think we'd see it trickle down into our schools. We learn our manners and rules of engagement from Kindergarten onwards. My teacher's name is Mrs. Smith, not Karen, etc.

I think this is a lame attempt by the Obama campaign to seem "in." On the Vice-Presidential debates last night, Sen. Biden continually referred to Sen. Obama as Barack - "Barack's position is X." It sounded weird just coming out of his mouth, and did nothing to convince me he was hip. It was obvious that that was not something he was comfortable with, so it undermined the entire portrayal.

Just my two cents - as a young, not even Gen Why-er :)

Can't turn left? Really? You mean like Zoolander? Or Johnny Drama?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSe6nYh9lwU

I think the point about making no eye contact can be more properly equated to George Bush senior's looking at his watch during the Clinton debate. He came across as impatient, imperious, irritated . . . sorry, I'll have to quit there. I'm out of "i" words.

Whether McCain was perceived as rude or distainful or something else, I think you have to be as careful about you come across physically under the white hot light of television as you are about what you say.

Because your expressions and mannerisms are often just as telling as words.

Michael:

Eye contact? Eye contact? Was this debate so boring, so predictable, so much "the approved rejoinder to the expected gambit," Michael, that the only thing of interest was McCain's failure to look Obama in the eye?
Of course, the fault is mainly ours, and by "ours" I mean us, the audience, our media, society. We whine and complain ceaselessly that we're tired of candidates who talk in sound bites--and then we set the format of our presidential debates to limit each candidate a two-minute answer to the question that has been posed. In other words, we practically decree that both will talk in nothing but sound bites.
For chrissakes, people in 1858 knew better! Pick a topic,allow each candidate AT LEAST 15 minutes to present the case for or against (Lincoln and Douglas spoke for two hours at a time!), then at least 10 minutes for rebuttal, and THEN allow questioning by experts and audience members.
The present format guarantees an exchange of slogans and high-sounding platitudes, which is apparently what we REALLY want, in spite of all protestations to the contrary.

It's funny to me that Sen. McCain was said to appear as the "alpha dog" in the debate. Whenever a dog feels inferior (or is being reprimanded by the alpha dog) he AVOIDS eye contact. Could the same reason be applied to McCain's refusal to look Obama in the eye? We can only speculate.

This was a direct strategy passed down from the Bush advisers McCain recently hired. McCain knows that if he engages Obama one on one he doesn't stand a chance. He simply is not a public speaker even with a teleprompter.

The first and almost ideal strategy was to "postponed" the debate under the disguise of our economy crisis. Obama called his bluff and so he decided "the economy had made enough progress" to debate.

The Rovian manner in which McCain has conducted his campaign only contributes to the belief that he in fact will be no different to Bush's third term.

Maybe he didn't look Obama in the eye because he realizes he is engaging in the same swiftboating tactics that were waged on him.

McCain's gone from putting his country first to doing whatever it takes to win the presidency. This type of approach is dangerous and should be a warning sign of things to come should he be elected.

While I don't often find a lot to agree about with Michael, and appreciate the sentiment of Jon's comment, I didn't see that Michael claimed McCain was afraid or where he actually criticized the lack of eye contact. Instead, Michael noted in his last sentence that it's just "his style of debate."

This is nothing new though. The familiarity was a deliberate tactic of Obama in much the same way that "Boomer" Al Gore, in 1992, constantly called the Vice President "Dan" during their debate. It's an attempt by the person of lesser experience or position to negate that advantage. Just as Gore knew calling Quayle "Mr. Vice President," would boost Quayle's image, so Obama needed to show himself as equal to McCain's large experience advantage by acting like a pal or at least a familiar colleague.

Now to Beth, in giving critique to Katy, I don't think she was talking about co-workers. She said "in a retail-environment," which I assumed meant some whipper-snapper salesperson you've never met before acting like your best friend.

Jon,

I can't speak for McCain's performances in the 2008 Republican debates, but his seething anger for then Gov. George W. Bush in 2000 was palpable on screen. In South Carolina, the pair, joined by Alan Keyes, squared off on Larry King Live and on a couple occasions McCain lectures both Bush and Keyes for their disrespectful behavior.

This clip isn't the real nasty meat of that debate, but it illustrates the point, I think.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50c2kgvojCs

There's also an amusing story from Time magazine of an off-camera exchange that took place between Bush and McCain back in 2000. Basically, Bush tried talking to McCain and the senator had this reaction (from Time):

"Don't give me that shit," McCain growled, pulling away. "And take your hands off me."

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,40723-1,00.html

Also, take a look at the press conference where McCain endorses Bush for president in 2000. Yikes! McCain is clearly uncomfortable.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEFrKWeFTSo&feature=related

That said, on Larry King Live at least, McCain makes a point of looking Keyes and Bush directly in the eye when lodging assaults at them.

On your point about Vietnamese prison, I actually read that McCain can't turn to his left as easily as the average person because of injuries sustained as a POW. Don't know if that's true, but it's being floated around right now.

It's called "body language" folks... It is part of communication. If you don't look your opponent in the eye, it brings up the question: Why not? Anger? Avoidance? Certainly not shyness. Prejudice? It makes one wonder.

You'll notice that the Obamas walked across the stage post-debate to shake hands, not the McCains. And I didn't see John McCain shake Obama's hand at that moment.

Yet another article discussing the importance of nonverbal communication in light of Friday's debate.. It says as much as 93% of information exchanged in a conversation is non-verbal. Regardless of our political climate, that is something for all communicators to keep in mind.

http://www.businessweek.com/managing/content/sep2008/ca20080929_440972.htm?chan=rss_topStories_ssi_5

That said, I was on the road during the debate and had the rudimentary experience of listening to it on the radio. I won't tell you who I thought won the debate because I support Obama.

Not sure why McCain didn't look Obama in the eye during the debate, but I doubt he's afraid of him.

Of course, maybe he is. Is this something you researched Michael? Do you have footage of McCain in other debates where you can tell whether he does this with other opponents? Not trying to criticize you...just curious. It might be something to look at.

For all we know, it might have something to do with the nine years he spent as a Vietnamese prison. He can't lift his arm up to a certain point because of the physical damage, so maybe he can't turn his head beyond a certain point. Again, I don't know. I'm speculating because I doubt it's that he's afraid of Obama.

Frankly...I don't care whether any politician can look me or anyone else in the eye. I'm not impressed by liars who are good enough at lying to look someone in the eye while they're doing it. The center of existence for these people is to get elected. They live and die by polls and public opinion and will say whatever they need to say to get elected.

Sorry, I should have addressed that to Katy

My apoligies

Candace, there is nothing disrespectful about addressing someone by their first name when (1) you know them, (2) you work with them and (3) they have never requested you not to use your first name.

What does lack manners is expecting co-workers to be psychic and know where your personal comfort lines fall, and then thinking THEY have failed someohow.

While it may be true that McCain's style is to not look an opponent in the eye - it does not bode well for him as president. Presidents often have to meet their opponents and not looking them in the eye - to me - is the mark of someone who is not open to negotiation or compromise. That's what we have in office already - a cowboy (maverick, if you will) who won't work with opponents - or allies for that matter - because he's too "focused" on whatever he's set his mind to do.

People like McCain and Bush are dangerous. McCain has just proven he's just like Bush and will govern just like him.

Heaven help us if he's elected.

I also read a column that claimed John McCain (I'm actually using his name not his position in life) came across as the "alpha dog" in the debate. But eye contact is key in establishing dominance and McCain just couldn't bear to look Obama in the eye. What does that say? The moderator continued to push for a direct exchange between the two and McCain refused. I guess his station in life is superior to that of Obama, or so he would have you believe.

It is disrespectful to not call a Senator a Senator ("Obama called Sen. McCain by his first name, John.)

I'm 37, and I can't stand people younger than me, in a retail environment, who think they can call me by my first name. Get a clue and some manners, and don't blame it on "Gen-whatever-ness."