Functional theory and political discourse: Televised debates in Israel and the United States

Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly

Volumn 83, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 281-297

  Benoit, William L ^a   Sheafer, Tamir ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI   (United States)

^b HEBREW UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEM   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ELECTORAL SYSTEM; NATIONAL POLITICS; POLICY STRATEGY; POLITICAL DISCOURSE; POLITICAL THEORY;

ASIA; EURASIA; ISRAEL; MIDDLE EAST; NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 33748642828     PISSN: 10776990     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/107769900608300204     Document Type: Article

References (106)

1. Books on presidential debates include William L. Benoit, P. M. Pier, LeAnn M. Brazeal, John P. McHale, A. Klyukovski, and David Airne, The Primary Decision: A Functional Analysis of Debates in Presidential Primaries (Westport, CT. Praeger, 2002);
2. William L. Benoit and William T. Wells, Candidates in Conflict: Persuasive Attack and Defense in the 1992 Presidential Debates (Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press, 1996);
3. George F. Bishop, Robert G. Meadow, and Marilyn Jackson-Beeck, eds., The Presidential Debates: Media, Electoral, and Policy Perspectives (New York: Praeger, 1980);
4. Lloyd Bitzer and Theodore Rueter, Carter versus Ford: The Counterfeit Debates of 1976 (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1980);
5. Diana B. Carlin and Mitchell S. McKinney, eds., The 1992 Presidential Debates in Focus (Westport, CT: Praeger, 1994);
6. Robert V. Friedenberg, ed., Rhetorical Studies of National Political Debates, 1960-1992, 2d ed. (New York: Praeger, 1994);
7. Robert V. Friedenberg, ed., Rhetorical Studies of National Political Debates-1996 (Westport, CT: Praeger, 1997);
8. Susan A. Hellweg, Michael Pfau, and Steven R. Brydon, Televised Presidential Debates: Advocacy in Contemporary America (New York: Praeger, 1992);
9. Edward A. Hinck, Enacting the Presidency: Political Argument, Presidential Debates, and Presidential Character (Westport, CT: Praeger, 1993);
10. Kathleen H. Jamieson and David S. Birdsell, Presidential Debates: The Challenge of Creating an Informed Electorate (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988);
11. Sidney Kraus, ed., The Great Debates: Kennedy vs. Nixon, 1960 (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1962);
12. Sidney Kraus, ed., The Great Debates: Carter versus Ford 1976 (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1979);
13. Sidney Kraus, Televised Presidential Debates and Public Policy, 2d ed. (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2000);
14. David J. Lanoue, "Debates that Mattered: Voters' Reaction to the 1984 Canadian Leadership Debates," Canadian Journal of Political Science 24 (March 1991): 51-65;
15. Myles Martel, Political Campaign Debates: Issues, Strategies, and Tactics (New York: Longman, 1983);
16. Alan Schroeder, Presidential Debates: Forty Years of High-Risk TV (New York: Columbia University Press, 2000);
17. Joel L. Swerdlow, ed., Presidential Debates 1988 and Beyond (Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly, 1987).
18. Erik Asard and Bruce E. Gronbeck, "Televised Party Leader and Presidential Candidate Debates in Sweden and the United States," in Argument at Century's End: Reflecting on the Past and Envisioning the Future, ed. Thomas A. Hollihan (Annandale, VA: National Communication Association, 2000), 394-402.
19. Benoit et al., The Primary Decision.
20. Ian Ward and Mary Walsh, "Leaders' Debates and Presidential Politics in Australia," in Televised Election Debates: International Perspectives, ed. Stephen Coleman (New York: St. Martin's Press, 2000), 43-65.
21. Stephen Coleman, "Meaningful Political Debate in the Age of the Soundbite," in Televised Election Debates: International Perspectives, ed. Coleman, 9-11.
22. Kendall L. Baker and Helmut Norpoth, "Candidates on Television: The 1972 Electoral Debates in West Germany," Public Opinion Quarterly 34 (autumn 1981): 329-45.
23. Thorsten Faas and Jurgen Maier, "Chancellor-Candidates in the 2002 Televised Debates," German Politics 13 (June 2004): 300-316.
24. Shoshana Blum-Kulka and Tamar Liebes, "Peres versus Netanyahu: Television Wins the Debate, Israel 1996," in Televised Election Debates: International Perspectives, ed. Stephen Coleman (London: MacMillan Press, 2000), 72.
25. William L. Benoit, Glenn J. Hansen, and Rebecca M. Verser, "A Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Viewing U.S. Presidential Debates," Communication Monographs 70 (December 2003): 335-50.
26. Baker and Norpoth, "Candidates on Television";
27. Andre Blais and M. Martin Boyer, "Assessing the Impact of Televised Debates: The Case of the 1988 Canadian Election," British Journal of Political Science 26 (April 1996): 143-64;
28. Faas and Maier, "Chancellor-Candidates in the 2002 Televised Debates";
29. David J. Lanoue and Peter R. Schrott, The Joint Press Conference: The History, Impact, and Prospects of American Presidential Debates (New York: Greenwood Press, 1991);
30. Peter R. Schrott and David J. Lanoue, "How to Win a Televised Debate: Candidate Strategies and Voter Response in Germany, 1972-1987," British Journal of Political Science 22 (October 1992): 45-467.
31. William L. Benoit, Joseph R. Blaney, and P. M. Pier, '96: A Functional Analysis of Acclaiming, Attacking, and Defending (New York: Praeger, 1998);
32. William L. Benoit and LeAnn M. Brazeal, "A Functional Analysis of the 1988 Bush-Dukakis Presidential Debates," Argumentation and Advocacy 38 (spring 2002): 219-33;
33. William L. Benoit and Allison Harthcock, "Functions of the Great Debates: Acclaims, Attacks, and Defense in the 1960 Presidential Debates," Communication Monographs 66 (December 1999): 341-57;
34. William L. Benoit, John P. McHale, Glenn J. Hansen, P. M. Pier, and John P. McGuire, Campaign 2000: A Functional Analysis of Presidential Campaign Discourse (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003);
35. William L. Benoit, Kevin A. Stein, John P. McHale, Sumana Chattopadhyay, Rebecca Verser, and Steve Price, Bush versus Kerry: A Functional Analysis of Campaign 2004 (New York; Peter Lang, in press);
36. William T. Wells, "An Analysis of Attacking, Acclaiming, and Defending Strategies in the 1976-1984 Presidential Debates" (Ph.D. diss., University of Missouri, Columbia, 1999).
37. William L. Benoit, Political Campaign Communication: A Functional Analysis (New York: Peter Lang, in press).
38. See, e.g., Asard and Gronbeck, "Televised Party Leader";
39. many of the chapters in Coleman, "Meaningful Political Debate."
40. Dariusz Galasinski, "Strategies of Talking to Each Other: Rule Breaking in Polish Presidential Debates," Journal of Language and Social Psychology 17 (June 1998): 165-82.
41. Matthew Matsaganis and Craig Weingarten, "The 2000 U.S. Presidential Debate versus the 2000 Greek Prime Minister Debate," American Behavioral Scientist 44 (August 2001): 2398-2409.18.
42. Baker and Norpoth, "Candidates on Television," 237.
43. Baker and Norpoth, "Candidates on Television," 336.
44. Robert E. Gilbert, "Television Debates and Presidential Elections: The United States and France," Journal of Social, Political and Economic Studies 7 (1982): 411-29.
45. Blum-Kulka and Liebes, "Peres versus Netanyahu," 66.
46. David Collier, "The Comparative Method," in Political Science: The State of the Discipline II, ed. Ada Finifter (Washington, DC: American Political Science Association, 1993), 105-19;
47. Arend Lijphart, "Comparative Politics and Comparative Method," American Political Science Review 65 (3, 1971): 682-93;
48. Adam Przeworski and Henry Teune, The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry (Malabar: Krieger, 1970).
49. Daniel C. Hallin and Paolo Mancini, Comparing Media Systems: Three Models of Media and Politics (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 6.
50. Collier, "The Comparative Method," 111;
51. see also: Przeworski and Teune, The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry.
52. Collier, "The Comparative Method."
53. Gideon Rahat and Reuven Y. Hazan, "Israel: The Politics of an Extreme Electoral System," in The Politics of Electoral Systems, ed. Michael Gallagher and Paul Mitchell (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 333.
54. Hallin and Mancini, Comparing Media Systems, 251.
55. Denis McQuail, Mass Communication Theory: An Introduction (London: Sage, 1994).
56. David L. Swanson and Paolo Mancini, eds. Politics, Media, & Modern Democracy (Westport, CT. Praeger, 1996).
57. Swanson and Mancini, eds., Politics, Media, & Modern Democracy.
58. Dan Caspi, "American-style Electioneering in Israel: Americanization versus Modernization," in Politics, Media, & Modern Democracy, ed. David L. Swanson and Paolo Mancini (Westport, CT: Praeger, 1996), 173-92;
59. Yoram Peri, Telepopulism: Media and Politics in Israel (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2004);
60. Gideon Rahat and Tamir Sheafer, "The Personalization(s) of Politics: Israel 1949-2003," Political Communication (forthcoming).
61. Gadi Wolfsfeld and Gabriel Weimann, "The Competition over the Media Agenda, 1996 & 1999" [in Hebrew], in The Elections in Israel-1999, ed. Asher Arian and Michal Shamir (Jerusalem: The Israel Democracy Institute, 2001), 383-410.
62. Fons van de Vijver and Kwok Leung, Methods and Data Analysis of Cross-Cultural Research (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1997);
63. see also Werner Wirt and Steffen Kolb, "Designs and Methods of Comparative Political Communication Research," in Comparing Political Communication: Theories, Cases, and Challenges, ed. Frank Esser and Barbara Pfetch (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), 87-111.
64. Karl Erik Rosengren, Jack M. McLeod, and Jay G. Blumler, "Comparative Communication Research: From Exploration to Consolidation," in Comparatively Speaking: Communication and Culture Across Space and Time, ed. Jay G. Blumler, Jack M. McLeod, and Karl Erik Rosengren (Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1992), 271-98.
65. William L. Benoit, Seeing Spots: A Functional Analysis of Presidential Television Advertisements, 1952-1996 (Westport, CT: Praeger, 1999);
66. William L. Benoit, "Retrospective versus Prospective Statements and Outcome of Presidential Elections," Journal of Communication 56 (2, 2006): 331-45;
67. Benoit, Blaney, and Pier, '96: A Functional Analysis;
68. Benoit and Brazeal, "A Functional Analysis";
69. Benoit, Hansen, and Verser, "A Meta-Analysis";
70. Benoit, Political Campaign Communication.
71. See, e.g., Benoit, Political Campaign Communication.
72. Sharyne Merritt, "Negative Political Advertising: Some Empirical Findings," Journal of Advertising 13 (3, 1984): 27-38;
73. Charles J. Stewart, "Voter Perception of Mud-Slinging in Political Communication," Central States Speech Journal 26 (winter 1975): 279-86.
74. William L. Benoit, "Presidential Campaign Discourse as a Causal Factor in Election Outcome," Western Journal of Communication 67 (winter 2003): 97-112.
75. Michal Shamir and Asher Arian, "Collective Identity and Electoral Competition in Israel," American Political Science Review 93 (June 1999): 265-77.
76. Benoit, Blaney, and Pier, '96: A Functional Analysis;
77. Benoit, Hansen, and Verser, "A Meta-Analysis";
78. Benoit et al., Bush versus Kerry;
79. Benoit and Brazeal, "A Functional Analysis";
80. Benoit and Harthcock, "Functions of the Great Debates";
81. Benoit and Wells, Candidates in Conflict;
82. Wells, "An Analysis of Attacking, Acclaiming, and Defending Strategies."
83. Oli Holsti, Content Analysis in Communication Research (New York: Free Press, 1952), 116.
84. Jacob Cohen, "A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales," Educational and Psychological Measurement 20 (spring 1960): 37-46.
85. J. Richard Landis and Gary G. Koch, "The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data," Biometrica 33 (3, 1977): 165.
86. For example: Jay G. Blumler, Communicating to Voters: Television in the First European Parliamentary Elections (London: Sage, 1983);
87. Jay G. Blumler and Michael Gurevitch, "'Americanization' Reconsidered: U.K.-U.S. Campaign Communication Comparisons Across Time," in Mediated Politics: Communication in the Future of Democracy, ed. Lance W. Bennett and Robert M. Entman (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2001), 380-403;
88. Frank Esser, Carsten Reinemann, and David Fan, "Spin Doctoring in British and German Election Campaigns: How the Press is Being Confronted with a New Quality of Political PR," European Journal of Communication 15 (June 2000): 209-39;
89. David M. Farrell, "Campaign Strategies and Tactics," in Comparing Democracies: Elections and Voting in Global Perspective, ed. Lawrence LeDuc, Richard G. Niemi, and Pippa Norris (Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1996), 160-83;
90. Lynda Lee Kaid, Jacques Gerstle, and Keith R. Sanders, eds., Mediated Politics in Two Cultures: Presidential Campaigning in the United States and France (New York: Praeger, 1991);
91. Rodiger Schmitt-Beck, "Of Readers, Viewers, and Cat-Dogs," in Comparative Politics: The Problem of Equivalence, ed. Jan W. van Deth (New York: Routledge, 1998), 222-46;
92. Holly A. Semetko, Jay G. Blumler, Michael Gurevitch, and David H. Weaver, The Formation of Campaign Agendas: A Comparative Analysis of Party and Media Roles in Recent American and British Elections (Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1991);
93. Swanson and Mancini, eds., Politics, Media, & Modern Democracy.
94. Adam Przeworski and Henry Teune, "Equivalence in Cross-National Research," Public Opinion Quarterly 30 (winter 1966-1967): 551-68.
95. Jacob Cohen, "A Power Primer," Psychological Bulletin 112 (July 1992): 155-59.
96. Benoit, "Presidential Campaign Discourse."
97. Shamir and Arian, "Collective Identity."
98. Baker and Norpoth, "Candidates on Television."
99. See Benoit and Wells, Candidates in Conflict.
100. Blum-Kulka and Liebes, "Peres versus Netanyahu."
101. Some evidence for such prospective voting behavior in Israel is presented by Michal Shamir and Asher Arian, "Abstention and Voting in the 2001 Elections" [in Hebrew], in The Israeli Elections 2001, ed. Asher Arian and Michal Shamir (Jerusalem: The Israel Democracy Institute, 2002), 7-28, who focus on individual voting behavior;
102. and by Tamir Sheafer and Gabriel Weimann, "Agenda-building, Agenda-setting, Priming, Individual Voting Intentions and the Aggregate Results: An Analysis of Four Israeli Elections," Journal of Communication 55 (June 2005): 347-65, who focus on the aggregate results. In the United States, on the other hand, studies show that voters are more retrospective, and that candidates are aware of this fact.
103. See, for example, John Boiney and David L. Paletz, "In Search of the Model Model: Political Science versus Political Advertising Perspectives on Voter Decision Making," in Television and Political Advertising, vol. 1, ed. Frank Biocca (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1991), 3-25.
104. Shamir and Arian, "Abstention and Voting in the 2001 Elections";
105. Sheafer and Weimann, "Agenda-building."
106. Boiney and Paletz, "In Search of the Model Model."