Article published in:
Language and Dialogue
Vol. 8:3 (2018) ► pp. 390–413

Interviewing for accountability

Ideological framing and argumentation

| Future University Hakodate (Japan)
| University of Sydney (Australia)
During the National Policy Institute’s national conference in Washington D.C. on Saturday November 19th, 2016, Richard Spencer delivered a speech in praise of the election victory of President Donald Trump. Shortly after the conference, Spencer was an invited guest on the News One Now programme in which he participated in a 32-minute interview with black journalist, host and managing editor Roland Martin. Drawing attention to the ideological aspects of the Martin/Spencer interview performance, we adopt the analytical lens of the Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA) to Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) (Musolff 2014; Reisigl and Wodak 2009; Wodak 2001, 2009) to explore argumentation as a discursive strategy through topoi or argumentative warrants (Reisigl and Wodak 2009; Wodak 2009, 2011, 2015; Wodak and Boukala 2015).
Keywords: accountability, argumentation, news interview, topoi
Article outline
  • 1.Preamble
  • 2.The news media as source of opinionated fact
  • 3.The news interview as ideological confrontation
  • 4.Approaches to argumentation
  • 5.Methods
    • 5.1Pre-interview framing
    • 5.2Interview analysis
  • 6.Conclusion
  • References
Published online: 02 November 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.00023.riv
References

References

Amossy, Ruth
2009 “The New Rhetoric’s Inheritance: Argumentation and Discourse Analysis.” Argumentation 231: 313–324. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Borschel, Audrey
2009 Preaching Prophetically when the News Disturbs. St. Louis, MO: Chalice Press.Google Scholar
Boukala, Salomi
2016 “Rethinking Topos in the Discourse Historical Approach: Endoxon seeking and Argumentation in Greek Media Discourses on ‘Islamist Terrorism’.” Discourse Studies 18(3): 249–268. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bull, Peter and Anita Fetzer
2006 “Who are we and who are you? The Strategic use of Forms of Address in Political Interviews.” Text & Talk 26(1): 3–37. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Charteris-Black, Jonathan
2014 Analysing Political Speeches: Rhetoric, Discourse and Metaphor. London: Palgrave Macmillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clayman, Steven
1988 “Displaying Neutrality in Television News Interviews.” Social Problems 351: 474–492. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clayman, Steven and John Heritage
2002 The News Interview. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Coleman, Renita and Stephen Banning
2006 “Network TV News’ Affective Framing of the Presidential Candidates: Evidence for a Second-Level Agenda-Setting Effect through Visual Framing.” J&MC Quarterly 831: 313–328. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ekström, Mats
2001 “Frågor, svar och icke-svar i politiska intervjuer: En samtalsanalys” [“Questions and Answers in Political Interviews”]. Nordicom Information 23(3): 57–74.Google Scholar
2009 “Announced Refusal to Answer: A Study of Norms and Accountability in Broadcast Political Interviews.” Discourse Studies 11(6): 681–702. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ekström, Mats and Marianna Patronas
2011 Talking Politics in Broadcast News. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Farr, Robert
1984 “Interviewing: An Introduction to the Social Psychology of the Interview.” In Psychology for Managers, ed. by Peter Cooper and Cary Makin, 176–194. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Fetzer, Anita
2006 “ ‘Minister, we will see how the public judges you’”: Media References in Political Interviews.” Journal of Pragmatics 38(2): 180–195. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fowler, Roger
1991 Language in the News. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gill, Ann and Karen Whedbee
1997 “Rhetoric.” In Discourse as Structure and Process, ed. by Teun van Dijk, 157–184. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Greatbatch, David
1988 “A Turn-taking System for British News Interviews.” Language in Society 171: 401–430. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grue, Jan
2009 “Critical Discourse Analysis, Topoi and Mystification: Disability Policy Documents from a Norwegian NGO.” Discourse Studies 11(3): 285–308. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hall, Stuart
1977 “Culture, the Media and the ‘Ideological’ Effect.” In Mass Communication and Society, ed. by James Curran, Michael Gurevitch, and Janet Woollacott, 315–348. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Harris, Sandra
1991 “Evasive Action: How Politicians Respond to Questions in Political Interviews.” In Broadcast Talk, ed. by Paddy Scannell, 76–99. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Harsin, Jayson
2015 “Regimes of Posttruth, Postpolitics and Attention Economies.” Communication, Culture & Critique 81: 327–333. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John
1985 “Analyzing News Interviews: Aspects of the Production of Talk for an Overhearing Audience.” In Handbook of Discourse Analysis, ed. by Teun van Dijk, 95–117. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hess-Lüttich, Ernest
2007 “(Pseudo-) Argumentation in TV-Debates.” Journal of Pragmatics 391: 1360–1370. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hutchby, Ian
2011 “Non-Neutrality and Argument in the Hybrid Political Interview.” Discourse Studies 13 (3): 349–365. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jutel, Olivier
2013 “American Populism and the New Political Economy of the Media Field.” Political Economy of Communication 11: 26–42.Google Scholar
Kienpointner, Manfred
2011 “Rhetoric.” In Pragmatics in Practice, ed. by Jan-Ola Ostman and Jef Verschueren, 264–277. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lauerbach, Gerda
2007 “Argumentation in Political Talk Show Interviews.” Journal of Pragmatics 39 (8): 1388–1419. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lauerbach, Gerda and Karin Aijmer
2007 “Argumentation in Dialogic Media Genres: Talk Shows and Interviews.” Journal of Pragmatics 39 (8): 1333–1341. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Linell, Per
1998 Approaching Dialogue: Talk, Interaction and Contexts in Dialogical Perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Luginbühl, Martin
2007 “Conversational Violence in Political TV Debates: Forms and Functions.” Journal of Pragmatics 39 (8): 1371–1387. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McNair, Brian
2000 Journalism and Democracy: An Evaluation of the Political Public Sphere. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Meehan, Eileen
2005 Why TV is Not Our Fault: Television Programming, Viewers and Who’s Really in Control. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Montgomery, Martin
2007 “The Discourse of the Broadcast News Interview: A Typology.” Journalism Studies 9(2): 260–277. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Moulton, Janice
1983 “A Paradigm of Philosophy: The Adversary Method.” In Discovering Reality, ed. by Sandra Harding and Merrill Hintikka, 149–64. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Musolff, Andreas
2014 “Metaphor in the Discourse-Historical Approach.” In Contemporary Critical Discourse Studies, ed. by Christopher Hart and Piotr Cap, 45–66. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
National Policy Institute
2017 http://​www​.npiamerica​.org/
ProPublica
2017 “About Us.” https://​www​.propublica​.org​/about/.
Reisigl, Martin and Ruth Wodak
2001 Discourse and Discrimination: Rhetorics of Racism and Antisemitism. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
2009 “The Discourse-Historical Approach.” In Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. Introducing Qualitative Methods, ed. by Ruth Wodak and Michael Meyer, 87–121. 2nd ed. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Richardson, John
2004 (Mis) Representing Islam: The Racism and Rhetoric of British Broadsheet Newspapers. Amsterdam. John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rivers, Damian J. and Andrew S. Ross
2018 “An Integrated Approach to Non-Verbal Performance in the Hybrid Political Interview.” Journal of Pragmatics 1321: 59–75. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Toulmin, Stephen
1958/2003 The Uses of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
van Rees, M. Agnes
2007 “Discourse Analysis and Argumentation Theory: The Case of Television Talk.” Journal of Pragmatics 39 (8): 1454–1463. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Walton, Douglas
1996 Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Weigand, Edda
2006 “Argumentation: The Mixed Game.” Argumentation 201: 59–87. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Willard, Charles Arthur
1989 A Theory of Argumentation. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar
Wodak, Ruth
2001 “The Discourse-Historical Approach.” In Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis (1st edition), ed. by Ruth Wodak and Michael Meyer, 63–95. London: Sage. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2009 The Discourse of Politics in Action. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
2011 The Discourse of Politics in Action, 2nd edition. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
2015 “Critical Discourse Analysis, Discourse-Historical Approach.” The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction, 1–14.Google Scholar
Wodak, Ruth and Salomi Boukala
2015 “European Identities and the Revival of Nationalism in the European Union: A Discourse Historical Approach.” Journal of Language and Politics 14(1): 87–109. CrossrefGoogle Scholar