Political Interviews

The text my partner and I were originally going to analyze was Robb Willer’s Ted Talk called How to have better political conversations. We decided not do analyze his speech however we did take inspiration from it. The text we analyzed in the end were article titles posted on The Washington Post written by a variety of people.

Although many people may like to think of America as a honest and moral nation, it is no secret that artifice has cemented itself as an indispensable skill, exploited by many to achieve their own ambitions. Artifice, characterized through the usage of cunning devices or expedients to deceive others, is often utilized by politicians and organizations to help push their own agendas. As illustrated by Chris Hedges in his social commentary, Empire of Illusion, “artifice” has emerged to become so ubiquitous and essential throughout American society, whether in business or the entertainment industry. Essential, in the essence that without it, people in any industry are more likely to be disadvantaged in achieving their personal goals. In today’s modern world, no area has seen more abuse of artifice than in the field of media and politics. Its common knowledge that newspapers skew reports to their own biases and politicians often tell half-truths to cover-up ulterior motives. Unfortunately, these politicians and media giants hold extremely influential positions in society, and their usage of artifice is extremely damaging to the integrity and accountability within the United States. As a result, the press as well as the general populace must utilize free speech to expose this behavior. Despite the complete immorality of the usage of artifice, such chicanery remains essential for success in media and politics.

What makes you want to watch the news? Is it the credibility and trustworthiness of the reporter, the emotion the story holds, or the logic and evidence the channel you are watching uses to get their point across? No matter what news channel you are watching, the reason you are watching is probably one the three listed above. These three things are actually all connected in a triangle called the “Rhetorical Situation”, where each is equally important and used in argument enhancement. The goal of my paper is to is to explain how, why, and when news channels like CNN, MSN, and FOX NEWS, use the three modes of persuasion to sell an argument.

Subsequently, Hedges adds “...The consistency and emotional appeal of the story are paramount…” thus emphasizing the importance of a personal narrative. Paramount meaning that the reactions are endless and will help the candidate obtain their goal because the opinion of the public is of utmost importance. In order to appeal to the public, convincing them to choose a leader must be gained through emotional manipulation. Pathological thinking is done often throughout this process as the candidates let the citizens hear what they want to hear, not what they need to hear. Essentially, the candidates will go to the ends of the earth to gain empathy from the audience because that is the key to winning as explained by Chris Hedges. Entertaining them and keeping their trust is part of the political

In 2004 the United States of America held a presidential election as it does every four years. Throughout the process, from primary to convention, from the debates to Election Day, both the candidates and the media relied on rhetoric to influence the thoughts of the electorate. Because of the close results of the 2000 election and the bitter court battle that followed, the rhetoric of the campaigns of both major candidates in 2004 was stronger and more focused than before. To show the uses of this rhetoric and its effects on the public through the media, several topics are discussed within. First, the language used by the candidates, followed by a discussion of the political conventions and a look at the

I chose Bernie sanders as the candidate that I would vote for. A couple of issues that I care about that Sanders also stands for are healthcare for all and same-sex marriage. Sanders position on everyone being able to have healthcare is supportive. In an interview with Ezra Klein of Vox, Sanders responded with, “Health care, to my mind, is a right of all people. That's what I believe. I think every man, woman, and child is entitled to health care”(1). He believes that healthcare should not be something that we have to qualify and fight for but that it should be our right to have good healthcare. He made a point by saying that despite having the affordable care act, we still have so many people that are still uninsured and underinsured while our country is paying almost double what any other nation faces (2). Sanders is for healthcare for all because he believes it’s our right to it despite our income and not be discriminated against for reasons such as our gender or previous health issues. He believes we shouldn’t be discriminated against just because we might have had a health issue that the insurance companies consider a higher risk of needing help later, which would mean

Politicians are considered by most people to be slick talkers and this is said rightly so because of their uses of rhetorical devices that they “used primarily to give a statement a positive or negative slant regarding a subject, they are sometimes called slanters” (Moore and Parker, 2007, p. 118). They are, known for their use of rhetorical analogy, by “likening one thing to another thing in order to convey a negative— or positive—feeling about it…” (Moore and Parker, 2007, p. 120). Then, the one of them that can promise the most change or the best benefits in their political debate may win but once when in office, they do the opposite of what they promised. They also use the ad hominem fallacy as a tactic to win voters over on their side by attacking there opponent’s character as well as their reputation and their motives. For these reasons politicians are, stereotyped because of the long

Politics are something that carries a lot of importance in today’s world, as it affects how different groups and countries interact with each other. Recently, the use of satire has been integrated into politics, using the once formal media as entertainment. Hosts are known to make fun of politicians for a variety of different reasons, whether it be petty or not, and use this method to send a message across or just to make people laugh. In Saturday Night Live’s segment, “Celebrity Family Feud: Political Edition”, the performers effectively demonstrate the problem with how politicians avoid answering questions by using parody and sarcasm to further accentuate their point.

The recent election in the United States provided a profound lesson in communication. It exposed the gap between truth and fiction as politicians, news and entertainment media, interest groups, genders, nationalities, and the public made clear their opinions, plans, hypocrisy, ambition, and their incredible ability to spin their words to support the platform they supported. Attempts to find the truth were challenged like never before, but if one focused on what was not said and what was not written, the truth was often glaringly obvious by the non-verbal communication that unmasked even the most polished. The Alfred’s and Hawthorn’s models come into play clearly as truth revealed the perfect spokes-model in Donald Trump’s wife, Melania,

The bodies of text we are choosing to examine are both Sanders’ and Clinton’s candidacy speeches, the transcripts of the primary debates, Clinton’s DNC speech, and the most recent transcripts of the presidential debates. Focusing on Clinton’s rhetoric before her interaction with Sanders, the height of her interaction with Sanders during the primaries, and the period where she no longer is running against him are crucial benchmarks in identifying a comprehensive timeline of her rhetoric.

In the article, “The President on Spanish-Language Television News”, authors Matthew Eshbaugh-Soha and Christine Balarezo analyze political news coverage in Spanish –language media. During a presidential election the media plays a significant part in keeping the public politically involved and can likely sway their opinion. This article proves that most often it’s more about the show than what you know. “Presidents can influence Spanish-language news by visiting locations and speaking about issues most pertinent to a Latino audience.” Studies show that this particular demographic is less likely to follow an election or be impacted by topics that don’t directly apply to them. Television outlets such as Telemundo and Univision devote

Conducting interviews is fundamental as a case manager. In order to understand more about good interviewing, I decided to watch an interview about an addict mother conducted by Dr. Phil. While watching this interview, I made some notes on attitudes and characteristics that I considered important for good interviewing. The characteristics will be presented in the following paragraphs.

In campaigning, media coverage plays a large role for candidates. They use the media to make their name heard and image seen. “Nearly everything a candidate does is geared toward the media, especially television” (Stuckey, 1999, p. 99) Candidates make appearances on talk shows,

This study examines second-level agenda setting, a process through which the media makes candidate personality traits salient in the audience’s mind through promoting an agenda of attributes. According to McCombs, Llamas, Lopez-Escobar, and Rey (1997)

The research for this article was conducted within a framework of Framing theory. The theory was first put forward by a Canadian-American sociologist Erving Goffman. Media framing, to put it bluntly, is a term that points to a presence of a certain bias in any media outlets’ output. All choices made in a newsroom collectively form the frame through which media decides to show the world to the audiences. Everything matters: Covering one event and ignoring another, covering one event more than the other, deciding what words to use to cover an event, what photographs or video clips to include, whom to give a voice, etc. At the same time, framing theory goes far beyond newsroom policies. Framing is not necessarily a delibirate choice. Journalists themselves look at the world through frames: their education, upbringing, gender, ethnical background, knowledge of the issue, and so on. Audience members apply their own frames as well, not just to media content, but to everything they hear and see.