Analyzing Presidential Debates Functional Theory and Finnish Political Communication Culture
نویسنده
چکیده
One of the most used theories in the research of political debates is the functional theory of campaign discourse. However, the theory has been criticized for being too culturally limited. In the present article, a Finnish presidential debate is analyzed from the perspective of functional theory. The goal is to critically evaluate the applicability of functional theory to the analysis of Finnish political campaigning. The results show that a Finnish presidential debate differs in many ways from an American presidential debate. The study shows how strongly the culture is reflected in political television debates and how important it is to take account of the cultural perspective in the development of a theory.
منابع مشابه
"You are no Jack Kennedy": On Media Selection of Highlights from Presidential Debates
Political speeches and debates play an important role in shaping the images of politicians, and the public often relies on media outlets to select bits of political communication from a large pool of utterances. It is an important research question to understand what factors impact this selection process. To quantitatively explore the selection process, we build a threedecade dataset of preside...
متن کاملSemantic networks and competition: Election year winners and losers in U.S. televised presidential debates, 1960-2004
Drawing on network theory, this study considers the content of U.S. presidential debates and how candidates’ language differentiates them. Semantic network analyses of all U.S. presidential debates (1960–2004) were conducted. Results reveal that regardless of party affiliation, election winners were more central in their semantic networks than losers. Although the study does not argue causation...
متن کاملLinguistic Construction of a Winning Apology
The study analyzes the apology delivered by the then-democratic Presidential contender in 2007, Senator Barack H. Obama, to the Indian-American community. This apology succeeded in convincing American citizens of Obama’s goodwill and clean political standards, which eventually led him to surpass his chief opponent, Senator Hillary R. Clinton and become the President of the United States. The st...
متن کاملCritical Discourse Analysis of Hedges and Boosters in Iranian TV Election Debates of Presidential Candidates
To win the attention of the audience, presidential candidates rely on their own rhetorical methods. Hedges and boosters as metadiscourse markers have been the focus of many studies as the communicative strategies enabling speakers to soften the force of utterances or moderate their assertive force. TV news was used as the corpus of this study, whereas most of the previous studies have focused o...
متن کاملStaying on Topic: An Indicator of Power in Political Debates
We study the topic dynamics of interactions in political debates using the 2012 Republican presidential primary debates as data. We show that the tendency of candidates to shift topics changes over the course of the election campaign, and that it is correlated with their relative power. We also show that our topic shift features help predict candidates’ relative rankings.
متن کامل