Scholarly record
MEDIA DISCOURSE AND AD HOMINEM COMMUNICATION IN TV DISCUSSIONS
Abstract
Television talk shows often present a mix of well-reasoned and baseless debates,showcasing diverse communication styles. The way individual attitudes are articulatedcan highlight instances where the speaker employs communication tools ofmanipulations. This study focuses on the presentation of arguments, specifically theconveyance of informative and persuasive functions pertaining to a range of political,economic, social, and personal topics. The objective is to identify instances of adhominem communication, determine the target audience of such communication, andanalyze the communication context and potential repercussions. Ad hominemcommunication arises when the speaker references an individual, using the argument totarget that person directly, thereby implicitly or explicitly undermining their credibility.This form of ad hominem is frequently observed in political discourse and competitivedialogues in general. For this research analytical matrix were employed as research toolsin order to conduct a qualitative content analysis of ad hominem communication inrelation to political, social, economic, and personal topics. The aim of this study is tointroduce a model for analyzing communication styles based on a specific tool designedto shape perceptions of others or oneself. This model's implications are demonstratedthrough an analysis of a random sample from two episodes of the Croatian RadioTelevision's Sunday talk shows, which rank among the most-watched talk shows onCroatian national television. The episodes were chosen using a random numberalgorithm. The findings reveal the instances and manners in which speakers in thesampled episodes employ the ad hominem communication.
Publication Impact Profile
- Captures
- Mendeley - Readers: 2
Publication details
References26
Benoit, P. J., & Benoit, W. L. (2005). Criteria for evaluating political campaign webpages. Southern Communication Journal, 70(3), 230-247.
Borcic, N. (2012). Konceptualna metafora i semanticka polja u tekstnoj vrsti politicki intervju u odnosu na rodne osobitosti [Conceptual metaphor and semantic fields in the text type of political interview in relation to gender characteristics] (Doctoral dissertation). Sveuciliste u Zadru, Zadar, Croatia.
Borcic, N. (2017). Meduodnos argumentacije, konceptualnih metafora i neverbalne komunikacije u javnim nastupima njemackih i hrvatskih politicara [Interrelation of argumentation, conceptual metaphors, and non-verbal communication in public appearances of German and Croatian politicians] (Doctoral dissertation). Sveuciliste Josipa Jurja Strossmayera u Osijeku, Osijek, Croatia.
Brinton, A. (1985). A rhetorical view of the ad hominem. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 63, 50-63.
Brinton, A. (1995). The ad hominem. In H. V. Hansen & R. C. Pinto (Eds.), Fallacies: Classical and contemporary readings (pp. 213-222). Pennsylvania State University Press.
Charteris-Black, J. (2005). Politicians and rhetoric. Palgrave Macmillan.
Charteris-Black, J. (2014). Analysing political speeches: Rhetoric, discourse and metaphor. Palgrave Macmillan.
Chilton, P. (2004). Analysing political discourse. Routledge.
Fahnestock, J., & Secor, M. (2004). A rhetoric of argument. McGraw Hill.
Fley, M. (1997). Talkshows im deutschen Fernsehen: Konzeption und Funktionen einer Sendeform. In H. D. Fischer (Ed.), Bochumer Studien zur Publizistik- und Kommunikationswissenschaft (pp. [page range missing]). Universitatsverlag N. Brockmeyer.
Girnth, H. (2002). Sprache und Sprachverwendung in der Politik: Eine Einfuhrung in die linguistische Analyse offentlich-politischer Kommunikation. Max Niemeyer Verlag.
Johnstone, H. W., Jr. (1952). Philosophy and argumentum ad hominem. Journal of Philosophy, 49, 489-498.
Johnstone, H. W., Jr. (1959). Philosophy and argument. Pennsylvania State University Press.
Kaid, L. (Ed.). (2004). Handbook of political communication research. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kienpointner, M., & Kindt, W. (1997). On the problem of bias in political argumentation. Journal of Pragmatics, 27, 555-585.
Krabbe, E. C. W., & Walton, D. N. (1993). It’s all very well for you to talk! Situationally disqualifying ad hominem attacks. Informal Logic, 15, 79-91.
Meyer, T., Ontrup, R., & Schicha, Ch. (2000). Die Inszenierung des politischen Welt-Bildes: Politikinszenierung zwischen medialem und politischem Eigenwert. In E. Fischer-Lichte & I. Pflug (Eds.), Inszenierung von Authentizitat (pp. 183-208). Francke.
Nimmo, D., & Sanders, K. R. (Eds.). (1981). Handbook of political communication. SAGE Publications.
Perloff, R. (2003). The dynamics of persuasion: Communication and attitudes in the 21st century. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Swanson, D., & Mancini, P. (Eds.). (1996). Politics and democracy. Praeger Series.
van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. (1984). Speech acts in argumentative discussions. Foris.
van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. (1995). Argumentum ad hominem: A pragma-dialectical case. In H. V. Hansen & R. C. Pinto (Eds.), Fallacies: Classical and contemporary readings (pp. 223-228). Pennsylvania State University Press.
van Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., Snoeck Henkemans, F., et al. (1996). Fundamentals of argumentation theory. Erlbaum.
Walton, D. (2007). Media argumentation: Dialectic, persuasion, and rhetoric. Cambridge University Press.
Walton, D. N. (1989). Informal logic. Cambridge University Press.
Zarefsky, D. (2009). Strategic maneuvering in political argumentation. In F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Examining argumentation in context (pp. 115–130). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
View or Download full articleAccess options
SWS access login
Login as SWS Scientific CommitteeLogin as SWS Scientific PartnerLogin as SWS AuthorAuthors and approved SWS contributors will read and export their own linked papers after identity matching by SWS profile, email and SGEM GlobalID.
For librarian assistance: [email protected]
Purchase Instant Access
- Article can be downloaded after successful payment.
- Article may be used according to SWS library access terms.
- Article cannot be redistributed.