A Comparative Study of Political Communication in Televised Pre-Election Debates in Poland and the United States of America

• Authors: Martin Hinton , Agnieszka Budzyńska-Daca
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

This paper combines quantitative and qualitative methodologies to study the persuasive strategies employed by candidates taking part in televised pre-election debates in Poland and the United States between 1995 and 2016. First, the authors identify the key strategies and calculate the frequency with which they are used by individual candidates. This allows for numerical comparisons between politicians in the two polities, as well as between winners and losers, and candidates of the right and the left politically. These statistical results led the authors to look more closely at the individual styles of two contrasting debaters. We conclude that the rhetorical landscape of political communication does not differ greatly between the two countries; although the data suggest noticeable differences in the approach of political parties and between individuals.

Keywords

EN

persuasion; political communication; political dialogue; rhetoric; debates

• Publisher: Uniwersytet Łódzki. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego
• Journal: Research in Language
• Year: 2019
• Volume: 17
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 1-19

Dates

published

2019-03-30

Contributors

author

Martin Hinton

• University of Łódź, Poland

author

Agnieszka Budzyńska-Daca

• University of Warsaw, Poland

References

• Aristotle. 1926. Rhetoric. Aristotle in 23 Volumes, Vol. 22. Translated by Freese J. H. Cambridge and London. Harvard University Press; William Heinemann Ltd.
• Benoit, William and Jayne Henson. 2007. A Functional Analysis of the 2006 Canadian and 2007 Australian Election Debates. Argumentation and Advocacy 44. 36-48.
• Benoit, William and Andrew Klyukovski. 2006. A Functional Analysis of the 2004 Ukrainian Debates. Argumentation 20. 209-225.
• Benoit, William and Tamir Sheafer. 2006. Functional Theory and Political Discourse: Televised Debates in Israel and the United States. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly 83(2). 281-297.
• Benoit, William, Wen, Wei-Chun and Tzu-hsiang Yu. 2007. A Functional Analysis of 2004 Taiwanese Political Debates. Asian Journal of Communication 17. 24-39.
• Bitzer, Lloyd and Ted Rueter. 1980. Carter vs. Ford: The Counterfeit Debates of 1976. Madison, Wis.: University of Wisconsin Press.
• Blake, Aaron. 2016. The Final Trump-Clinton Debate Transcript, Annotated. The Washington Post. [Online] Available at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/19/the-final-trump-clinton-debate-transcript-annotated/?utm_term=.0aabed5feedc [Accessed on: 10 September 2017]
• Budzyńska-Daca, Agnieszka. 2016. ‘Dlaczego (i dla kogo) warto poprawić polskie debaty przedwyborcze.’ In Agnieszka Budzyńska-Daca (ed.) 20 lat polskich telewizyjnych debat przedwyborczych. Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Polonistyki UW, pp. 215-242.
• Budzyńska-Daca, Agnieszka. 2015. Retoryka debaty. Polskie wielkie debaty przedwyborcze 1995-2010. Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
• Coleman, Stephen. 1997. Televised Leaders’ Debates. An Evaluation and Proposal. King Hall Papers. London: The Hansard Society.
• Debates International. 2018. A Global Resource on Candidate Debates. [Online] Available at: http://www.debatesinternational.org [Accessed on: 05 January 2018].
• Faas, Thorsten and Jürgen Maier. 2004. Chancellor-Candidates in the 2002 Televised Debates. German Politics 13(2). 300-316.
• Faas, Thorsten and Jürgen Maier. 2011. Miniature Campaigns’ in Comparison: The German Televised Debates, 2002-09. German Politics 20(1). 75-91.
• Friedenberg, Robery. 1997. ‘Patterns and Trends in National Political Debates: 1960-1996.’ In Robert Friedenberg (ed.), Rhetorical Studies of National Political Debates – 1996, 61-91. Westport, CT: Praeger.
• Jalilifar, Alireza and Maryam Alavi-Nia. 2012. We Are Surprised; Wasn’t Iran Disgraced There? A Functional Analysis of Hedges and Boosters in Televised Iranian and American Presidential Debates. Discourse & Communication, 6(2). 135-161.
• Kerbat-Orecchioni, Catherine. 1992. Les interactions verbales, Vol.2, Paris: Armand Colin.
• Kostro, Monika and Krystyna Wróblewska-Pawlak. 2016. Panie Prezydencie, Monsieur le Président… . Formy adresatywne w polskim i francuskim dyskursie polityczno-medialnym. Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego.
• Kraus, Sidney. 2000. Televised Presidential Debates and Public Policy. Edition: 2nd. Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.
• McKinney, Mitchell and Diana Carlin. 2004. ‘Political Campaign Debates.’ In Linda Kaid (ed.) Handbook of Political Communication Research, 203-234. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Meadow, Robert. 1983. ‘Televised Presidential Debates as Whistle Stop Speeches.’ In William Adams (ed.), Televised Coverage of the 1980 Presidential Campaign, 89-102. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
• Minow, Newton and Craig Lamay. 2008. Inside the Presidential Debates: Their Improbable Past and Promising Future. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
• OECD. 2015. PISA 2015. Poland. [Online] Available at: http://www.compareyourcountry.org/pisa/country/POL?lg=en [Accessed on: 10 September 2017]
• Quintilian, Marcus Fabius. 1922. Institutionis Oratoriae. Quintilian with an English Translation. Translated by Butler H E. London: Heineman.
• Schroeder, Alan. 2000. Presidential Debates: Forty Years of High-Risk TV. New York: Columbia University Press.

Identifiers

DOI

10.2478/rela-2019-0002