PL EN


Journal
2016 | 3 | 2 | 12-27
Article title

The rhetorical construction of Hillary Rodham Clinton as a presidential contender in 2016: A case study of hillaryclinton.com

Content
Title variants
Retoryczne sposoby konstruowania wizerunku Hillary Rodham Clinton w kampanii prezydenckiej 2016: Studium strony hillaryclinton.com
Languages of publication
EN
Abstracts
EN
This article reviews some of the rhetorical means of constructing the image of Hillary Rodham Clinton as a presidential contender in 2016 election campaign. It explores this in the context of research on “gendered” political discourse particularly political campaigning and media coverage of female contenders. It argues that women politicians in the US need to be much more pro-active in controlling the construction of their public perception than male politicians. It reviews previous studies to verify whether there is more continuity or innovation in the rhetorical construction of Hillary Clinton’s political leadership. The materials from the official webpage (hillaryclinton.com) publicized in 2016 are analyzed with respect to persuasive presentational techniques and verbal and visual rhetorical devices.
PL
Niniejsze studium poświęcone jest retorycznym sposobom konstruowania obrazu kandydatki na prezydenta USA Hillary Rodham Clinton podczas pierwszej fazy kampanii 2016 roku. Kontekstem studium jest literatura na temat różnic genderowych w dyskursie politycznym, a w szczególności badania poświęcone medialnym reprezentacjom kobiet w polityce, z których wynika, że kobiety, przynajmniej w USA, muszą bardziej aktywnie niż mężczyźni kreować swój publiczny wizerunek. Za pomocą perspektywy retorycznej, zbadano strategiczny sposób konstruowania i kontrolowania publicznego obrazowania Hillary Clinton w reakcji na przedstawienia jej kandydatury przez media głównego nurtu. Analizie poddano materiały tekstowe i wizualne z ofi cjalnej strony internetowej (hillaryclinton.com) z początku 2016 roku z punktu widzenia zastosowanych technik prezentacji i perswazji.
Journal
Year
Volume
3
Issue
2
Pages
12-27
Physical description
Dates
published
2016
Contributors
References
  • Ahrens, Kathleen (ed.). 2009. Politics, Gender and Conceptual Metaphors. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Bligh, Michelle C., Michele M. Schlehofer, Bettina J. Casad, and Amber M. Gaffney. 2012.“Competent Enough, But Would You Vote for Her? Gender Stereotypes and Media Influences on Perceptions of Women Politicians.” Journal of Applied Social Psychology 42 (3): 560-598.
  • Bucholtz Mary, and Kira Hall. 1995. Gender Articulated: Language and the Socially Constructed Self. London: Routledge.
  • Cameron, Deborah. 1998. “Gender, Language and Discourse: A Review Essay.” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 23: 945-973.
  • Campbell, Karlyn Kohrs. 1989. Man Cannot Speak for Her. A Critical Study of Early Feminist Rhetoric, Vol. 1. New York: Greenwood Press.
  • Charteris-Black, Jonathan. 2005. Politicians and Rhetoric: The Persuasive Power of Metaphor. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.
  • Clinton, William Jefferson. 2004. My Life. New York: Random House.
  • Chouliaraki, Lillie and Norman Fairclough. 1999. Discourse in Late Modernity: Rethinking Critical Discourse Analysis. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
  • Fairclough, Norman. 1989. Language and Power. New York: Longman.
  • Giordano, Michela. 2012. 18 million Cracks in the Glass Ceiling: Language, Gender and Power in Hillary Clinton’s Political Rhetoric. Cagliari: Master Aipsa Edizioni.
  • Jamieson, Kathleen H. 1995. Beyond the Double Bind. Women and Leadership. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Kahn, Kim F. 1996. The Political Consequences of Being a Woman. How Stereotypes Influence the Conduct and Consequences of Political Campaign. New York: Columbia University Press.
  • Lacy, Marie L. 1996. The Power of Colour to Heal the Environment. London: Rainbow Bridge Publications.
  • Lakoff, Robin. 1975. Language and Woman’s Place. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Lawrence, Regina G., and Melody Rose. 2010. Hillary Clinton’s Race for the White House. Gender Politics and the Media on the Campaign Trail. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
  • Lazar, Michelle M. 2007. “Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis: Articulating a Feminist DiscoursePraxis.” Critical Discourse Studies 4(2): 141-164.
  • Molek-Kozakowska, Katarzyna. 2010. “Personalization in Political Discourse: Its Pragma-linguistic Realizations and Potential Persuasive Effects.” In Pragmatic Perspectives on Language and Linguistics: Pragmatics of Semantically-restricted Domains, ed. Iwona Witczak-Plisiecka, 51-64. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  • Nielsen, Jacob, and Marie Tahir. 2002. Homepage Usability: 50 Websites Deconstructed. Indianapolis: New Riders.
  • Ponton, Douglas. 2010. “The Female Political Leader: A Study of Gender Identity in the Case of Margaret Thatcher.” Journal of Language and Politics 9(2): 195-218.
  • Tannen, Deborah. 1994. Gender and Discourse. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Tannen, Deborah. 1999. “The Display of (Gendered) Identities in Talk at Work.” In Reinventing Identities. The Gendered Self in Discourse, ed. Mary Bucholtz, A.C. Liang, and Laurel Sutton,221-240. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Weatherall, Ann. 2002. Gender, Language and Discourse. London: Routledge.
  • West, Candace, Michelle M. Lazar, and Cheris Kramarae. 1997. “Gender in Discourse.” In Discourse as Social Interaction, Vol. 2, ed. Teun A. van Dijk, 119-143, London: Sage.
  • Vasanta, Duggirala. 2001. “Researching Language and Gender: A Critical Review.” Indian Journal of Gender Studies 8(1): 69-87.
Document Type
Publication order reference
YADDA identifier
bwmeta1.element.ojs-doi-10_17380_rr_2016_2_2
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.