This paper investigates one specific aspect of impression management (self-presentation as an ordinary person) of the candidates during the 2016 Austrian presidential campaign on Twitter and asks whether the candidates’ campaigns followed the innovation or the normalization hypothesis. By applying Goffman’s concepts of “giving” vs. “giving off” information to the affordances of political communication on Twitter, a communicated ordinariness strategy is distinguished from a staged ordinariness strategy. Different forms of these two strategies are identified in the candidates’ tweets by investigating the pictorial and verbal elements of their tweets. Results show that both strategies are employed rather infrequently in all but one of the candidates’ tweets. Only one of the candidates used a staged ordinariness strategy during one phase of the campaign. These results show that most candidates employed communication strategies which conform to the normalization hypothesis rather than to the innovation hypothesis. Furthermore, the results suggest that following a consistent communication strategy throughout an entire campaign might ultimately lead to electoral success.
Agha, Asif. 2007. Language and Social Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bullingham, Liam, and Ana C. Vasconcelos. 2013. ‘“The Presentation of Self in the Online World”: Goffman and the Study of Online Identities’. Journal of Information Science 39 (1): 101–112.
Chilton, Paul Anthony. 2004. Analysing Political Discourse. Theory and Practice. London: Routledge.
Draucker, Fawn, and Lauren Collister. 2015. ‘Managing Participation through Modal Affordances on Twitter’. Open Library of Humanities 1 (1):n.p.
Dynel, Marta. 2014. ‘On the Part of Ratified Participants: Ratified Listeners in Multi-Party Interactions’. Brno Studies in English 40 (1): 27–44.
Fetzer, Anita. 2006. ‘“Minister, We Will See How the Public Judges You.”’ Journal of Pragmatics 38 (2): 180–195.
Goffman, Erving. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, Anchor Books.
Goffman, Erving. 1974. Frame Analysis. An Essay on the Organization of Experience. New York: Harper & Row.
Gruber, Helmut. 2017. ‘Quoting and Retweeting as Communicative Practices in Computer Mediated Discourse’. Discourse, Context & Media 20: 1–9.
Gruber, Helmut. 2018. ‘Genres of Political Communication in Web 2.0’. In Handbook of Political Communication, ed. by Ruth Wodak and Bernhard Forchner, 412–425. London: Taylor & Francis.
Gruber, Helmut. forthcoming. ‘Candidates’ Use of Twitter during the 2016 Austrian Presidential Campaign’. In The Pragmatics of Internet Communication, ed. by Chaoqun Xie and Francisco Yus. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
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, 1:95–117. London: Adademic Press.
Hess-Lüttich, Ernest W. B.2007. ‘(Pseudo-)Argumentation in TV-Debates’. Journal of Pragmatics 39 (8): 1360–1370.
John, Nicholas A.2013. ‘Sharing and Web 2.0: The Emergence of a Keyword’. New Media & Society 15 (2): 167–182.
Kendon, Adam. 1996. ‘Goffman’s Approach to Face-to-Face Interaction’. In Erving Goffman. Exploring the Interaction Order, ed. by Paul Drew and Anthony Wootton, 14–41. Oxford: Polity Press.
Khamis, S., L. Ang, and R. Welling. 2017. ‘Self-Branding, “Micro-Celebrity” and the Rise of Social Media Influencers’. Celebrity Studies 8 (2): 191–208.
Kietzmann, Jan H., Kristopher Hermkens, Ian P. McCarthy, and Bruno S. Silvestre. 2011. ‘Social Media? Get Serious! Understanding the Functional Building Blocks of Social Media’. Business Horizons 54 (3): 241–251.
Koc-Michalska, Karolina, R Gibson, and Thierry Vedel. 2014. ‘Online Campaigning in France, 2007–2012: Political Actors and Citizens in the Aftermath of the Web.2.0 Evolution’. Journal of Information Technology & Politics 11 (2): 220–244.
Kress, Gunter, and Theo van Leeuwen. 1996. Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design. London: Routledge.
Larsson, Anders O., and Bente Kalsnes. 2014. ‘“Of Course We Are on Facebook”: Use and Non-Use of Social Media among Swedish and Norwegian Politicians’. European Journal of Communication 29 (6): 653–667.
Levinson, Stephen. 2006. ‘On the Human “Interaction Engine”’. In Roots of Human Sociality: Culture, Cognition and Interaction, ed. by Nicholas J. Enfield and Stephen Levinson, 36–69. Oxford: Berg.
Marwick, A., and d. boyd. 2011. ‘To See and Be Seen: Celebrity Practice on Twitter’. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies 17 (2): 139–158.
Marwick, Alice. 2012. ‘The Public Domain: Surveillance in Everyday Life’. Surveillance & Society 9 (4): 378–393.
Page, Ruth. 2012. ‘The Linguistics of Self-Branding and Micro-Celebrity in Twitter: The Role of Hashtags’. Discourse & Communication 6 (2): 181–201.
Papacharissi, Zizi. 2012. ‘Without You, I’m Nothing: Performances of Self on Twitter’. International Journal of Communication 6: 1989–2006.
Strawson, Peter F.1964. ‘Intention and Convention in Speech Acts’. The Philosophical Review 73 (4): 439–460.
Vitak, Jessica. 2012. ‘The Impact of Context Collapse and Privacy on Social Network Site Disclosures’. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 56 (4): 451–470.
Wilson, Deirdre, and Dan Sperber. 2006. ‘Relevance Theory’. In The Handbook of Pragmatics, ed. by Laurence R. Horn and Gregory Ward, 606–632. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Zappavigna, Michele. 2015. ‘Searchable Talk: The Linguistic Functions of Hashtags’. Social Semiotics 25 (3): 274–291.
Cited by (10)
Cited by ten other publications
Enli, Gunn
2024. Populism as “Truth”: How Mediated Authenticity Strengthens the Populist Message. The International Journal of Press/Politics
Hansson, Sten & Ruth Page
2023. Legitimation in government social media communication: the case of the Brexit department. Critical Discourse Studies 20:4 ► pp. 361 ff.
Fetzer, Anita
2022. Small stories and accountability of discursive action in mediated political discourse: Contextualisation and recontextualisation of ordinary and not-so-ordinary participants. Frontiers in Communication 7
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.