“Protect our homeland!” Populist communication in the 2018 Hungarian election campaign on Facebook

• Authors: Tamás Tóth , Dalma Kékesdi-Boldog , Tamás Bokor , Zoltán Veczán
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The research presented in this paper is based on analysis of the Facebook posts of five major Hungarian political parties over the course of the official campaign season leading up to the 2018 parliamentary elections. We conducted a mixed-method analysis on 795 Facebook posts. First, the main topics of the parties were collected. Second, the posts of the parties were analyzed from a populist communicational perspective. Third, we tried to find some correlations between the basic topics and the populist communicational categories. Finally, we outline possible differences and similarities between parties’ communication. Our analysis shows that opposition parties did not have a common communicational strategy on Facebook while ruling parties emphasized both inner and exterior threats that could destabilize Hungary.

Keywords

EN

populism in Hungary; social media; political communication; campaign rhetoric; populist communication; Hungarian parliamentary campaign in 2018

• Publisher: Polskie Towarzystwo Komunikacji Społecznej
• Journal: Central European Journal of Communication
• Year: 2019
• Volume: 12
• Issue: 2(23)
• Pages: 169-186

Dates

published

2019-07-23

Contributors

author

Tamás Tóth

• Corvinus University of Budapest

author

Dalma Kékesdi-Boldog

• Corvinus University of Budapest

author

Tamás Bokor

• Corvinus University of Budapest

author

Zoltán Veczán

• Corvinus University of Budapest

References

• Abts, K., & Rummens, S. (2007). Populism versus democracy. Political Studies, 55(2), 405–424.
• Albertazzi, D., & McDonnell, D. (Eds.). (2008). Twenty-first century populism: The spectre of Western European democracy. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave.
• Aslanidis, P. (2018). Measuring populist discourse with semantic text analysis: An application on grassroots populist mobilization. Quality & Quantity, 52(3), 1241–1263.
• Bajomi-Lázár, P., & Kékesdi-Boldog, D. (2018). Zurück in die Zukunft. Autoritäre Medienpolitik in Ungarn. Osteuropa, 3–5, 273–282.
• Bernáth, G., & Messing, V. (2015). Bedarálva: A menekültekkel kapcsolatos kormányzati kampány és a tőle független megszólalás terepei [Governmental anti-migrant narratives and the potentials of independent discourses]. Médiakutató, 16(4), 7–17.
• Betz, H. G. (2004). Exclusionary populism in Western Europe in the 1990s and beyond, program paper no. 9. New York: United Nations Research Institute for Social Development.
• Block, E., & Negrine, R. (2017). The populist communication style: Toward a critical framework. International Journal of Communication, 11, 178–197.
• Bonikowski, B., & Gidron, N. (2015). The populist style in American politics: Presidential campaign discourse, 1952–1996. Social Forces, 94(4), 1593–1621.
• Bracciale, R., & Martella, A. (2017). Define the populist political communication style: The case of Italian political leaders on Twitter. Information, Communication & Society, 20(9), 1310–1329.
• Canovan, M. (2002). Taking politics to the people: Populism as the ideology of democracy. In Y. Mény & Y. Surel (Eds.), Democracies and the populist challenge (pp. 25–44). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Csigó, P., & Merkovity, N. (2016). Hungary: Home of empty populism. In T. Aalberg, F. Esser, C. Reine- mann, J. Stromback & C. de Vreese (Eds.), Populist political communication in Europe (pp. 299– 325). New York: Routledge.
• de Koster, W., Achterberg, P., & Van Der Waal, J. (2013). The new right and the welfare state: The electoral relevance of welfare chauvinism and welfare populism in the Netherlands. International Political Science Review, 34(1), 3–20.
• Demeter, M. (2017). Control, communication, and the voice of the leader: A control-character analysis of the 2016 us presidential debate. KOME − An International Journal of Pure Communication Inquiry, 5(1), 40–64.
• Demeter, M. (2018). Propaganda against the West in the Heart of Europe: A masked official state campaign in Hungary. Central European Journal of Communication, 11, 177–197.
• Doerfel, M. L., & Taylor, M. (2017). The story of collective action: The emergence of ideological leaders, collective action network leaders, and cross-sector network partners in civil society. Journal of Communication, 67(6), 920–943.
• Ekström, M., & Morton, A. (2017). The performances of right-wing populism: Populist discourse‚ embodied styles and forms of news reporting. In M. Ekström & A. Morton (Eds.), The mediated politics of Europe: A comparative study of discourse (pp. 289–316). Cambridge: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Elchardus, M., & Spruyt, B. (2016). Populism, persistent republicanism and declinism: An empirical analysis of populism as a thin ideology. Government and Opposition, 51(1), 111–133.
• Engesser, S., Ernst, N., Esser, F., & Büchel, F. (2017). Populism and social media: How politicians spread a fragmented ideology. Information, Communication & Society, 20(8), 1109–1126.
• Enli, G., & Rosenberg, L. T. (2018). Trust in the age of social media: Populist politicians seem more authentic. Social Media and Society, 4(1), 1–11.
• Fennema, M. (1997). Some conceptual issues and problems in the comparison of anti-immigrant parties in western Europe. Party Politics, 3(4), 473–492.
• Freelon, D. (2010). ReCal: Intercoder reliability calculation as a web service. International Journal of Internet Science, 5(1), 20–33.
• Hameleers, M. (2018). A typology of populism: Toward a revised theoretical framework on the sender side and receiver side of communication. International Journal of Communication, 12, 2171–2190.
• Hawkins, K. A., & Kaltwasser, C. R. (2018). Measuring populist discourse in the United States and beyond. Nature Human Behaviour, 2(4), 241–242.
• Jagers, J., & Walgrave, S. (2007). Populism as political communication style: An empirical study of political parties discourse in Belgium. European Journal of Political Research, 46(3), 319–345.
• Kaltwasser, C. R. (2012). The ambivalence of populism: Threat and corrective for democracy. Democratization, 19(2), 184–208.
• Karácsony, G. & Róna, D. (2010). A Jobbik titka: a szélsőjobb magyarországi megerősödésének lehetséges okairól [The Jobbik Secret. Possible reasons for the strengthening of the far-right in Hungary]. Politikatudományi Szemle, 19(1), 31–63.
• Laclau, E. (1977). Politics and ideology in Marxist theory. London: New Left Books.
• Laclau, E. (1980). Populist rupture and discourse. Screen Education, 34(Spring), 87–93.
• Laclau, E. (2005a). On populist reason. London: Verso.
• Laclau, E. (2005b). Populism: What’s in a name? In F. Panizza (Ed.), Populism and the mirror of democracy (pp. 32–49). London: Verso.
• Laclau, E. (2006). Why constructing a people is the main task of radical politics. Critical Inquiry, 32(4), 646–680.
• Moffitt, B. (2016). The global rise of populism: Performance, political style, and representation. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
• Moffitt, B., & Tormey, S. (2014). Rethinking populism: Politics, mediatisation and political style. Political Studies, 62(2), 381–397.
• Mudde, C. (2007). Populist radical right parties in Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Mudde, C. (2009). Populist radical right parties in Europe Redux. Political Studies Review, 7(3), 330–337.
• Mudde, C. (2016). Europe’s populist surge: A long time in the making. Foreign Affairs, 95, 25–30.
• Oesch, D. (2008). Explaining workers’ support for right-wing populist parties in Western Europe: Evidence from Austria, Belgium, France, Norway, and Switzerland. International Political Science Review, 29, 349–373.
• Pal, J., Chandra, P., Chirumamilla, P., Kameswaran, V., Gonawela, G., Thawani, U., & Dasgupta, P. (2017). Innuendo as outreach: @narendramodi and the use of political irony on Twitter. International Journal of Communication, 11, 4197–4218.
• Pauwels, T. (2011). Measuring populism: A quantitative text analysis of party literature in Belgium. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties, 21(1), 97–119.
• Pauwels, T. (2014). Populism in Western Europe: Comparing Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands. London, UK: Routledge.
• Ramiro, L. (2017). Radical-left populism during the Great Recession: Podemos and its competition with the established radical left. Political Studies, 65(15), 108–126.
• Ribera, P. P. (2018). Measuring populism in Spain: Content and discourse analysis of Spanish political parties. Journal of Contemporary European Studies, online first, 1–33. Retrieved October 22, 2018, from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/14782804.2018.1536603?casa_token=e614LRUwNjQAAAAA:7lE9u25E6FaJqWwAxxb4HRjl7r3PjSp9m2NQm4XlJsenuwoKAI8KC0Hzlxo8vozjjsvRrTSC2L3a.
• Rooduijn, M., & Pauwels, T. (2011). Measuring populism: Comparing two methods of content analysis. West European Politics, 34(6), 1272–1283.
• Schulz, A., Müller, P., Schemer, C., Wirz, D. S., Wettstein, M., & Wirth, W. (2017). Measuring populist attitudes on three dimensions. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 30(2), 316–326.
• Stanley, B. (2008). The thin ideology of populism. Journal of Political Ideologies, 13(1), 95–110.
• Svallfors, S. (1997). Worlds of welfare and attitudes to redistribution: A comparison of eight Western countries. European Sociological Review, 13(2), 283–304.
• Tajfel, H. (1978). Social categorization, social identity, and social comparisons. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Differentiation between social groups (pp. 61–76). London, UK: Academic Press.
• Weyland, K. (2001). Clarifying a contested concept: Populism in the study of Latin American politics. Comparative Politics, 34(1), 1–22.

Identifiers

DOI

10.19195/1899-5101.12.2(23).4