Persuasive Strategies of a Three-time Presidential Candidate, Lee Hoi-Chang, in 1997, 2002, 2007 Korean Presidential Debates
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This study analyzes the differences/similarities of the rhetorical strategies in TV presidential debates used by Lee Hoi-Chang, a three-time presidential candidate in Korea, in 1997, 2002, and 2007. It investigated how contextual factors such as a candidate’s party affiliation (incumbent party, challenger party, or third party), debate formats,and opponents (front-runner and running-behind candidates) influenced Lee’s rhetorical strategies in debates during the three elections. Content analysis of nine TV presidential debates throughout three elections was conducted using Benoit’s functional analysis framework (acclaiming/attacking/defending, issue/character). The results showed that the rhetorical strategy did not differ according to Lee Hoi-Chang’s position (as a candidate for the incumbent party, challenger party or a third party). Policies were clearly emphasized most frequently as a challenger candidate in the 2002 debate, and least frequently as a third-party candidate in the 2007 debate. The emphasis on the candidate’s image was highlighted most frequently as a third party candidate in the 2007 debate, and least frequently as a challenger party candidate in the 2002 debate. Finally, the defending strategy was used most frequently during cross-examination between the candidates, though the attacking strategy was used more frequently in thisformat; the defending strategy was almost never used in other formats. Lee Hoi-Chang’s attacking concentrated mainly on the front-runner candidates rather than on minor candidates throughout the three campaign cycles. Lee’scriticism in attacking styles was used more frequently on minor candidates and that condemnation would be used more frequently on front-runner candidates. This study suggests that comparison of an individual candidate’s debate discourses across multiple campaigns is needed in future research.
Abstract
This study analyzes the differences/similarities of the rhetorical strategies in TV presidential debates used by Lee Hoi-Chang, a three-time presidential candidate in Korea, in 1997, 2002, and 2007. It investigated how contextual factors such as a candidate’s party affiliation (incumbent party, challenger party, or third party), debate formats,and opponents (front-runner and running-behind candidates) influenced Lee’s rhetorical strategies in debates during the three elections. Content analysis of nine TV presidential debates throughout three elections was conducted using Benoit’s functional analysis framework (acclaiming/attacking/defending, issue/character). The results showed that the rhetorical strategy did not differ according to Lee Hoi-Chang’s position (as a candidate for the incumbent party, challenger party or a third party). Policies were clearly emphasized most frequently as a challenger candidate in the 2002 debate, and least frequently as a third-party candidate in the 2007 debate. The emphasis on the candidate’s image was highlighted most frequently as a third party candidate in the 2007 debate, and least frequently as a challenger party candidate in the 2002 debate. Finally, the defending strategy was used most frequently during cross-examination between the candidates, though the attacking strategy was used more frequently in thisformat; the defending strategy was almost never used in other formats. Lee Hoi-Chang’s attacking concentrated mainly on the front-runner candidates rather than on minor candidates throughout the three campaign cycles. Lee’scriticism in attacking styles was used more frequently on minor candidates and that condemnation would be used more frequently on front-runner candidates. This study suggests that comparison of an individual candidate’s debate discourses across multiple campaigns is needed in future research.
참고문헌 (45)
- Benoit, P. J., "Telling the success story: Acclaiming and disclaiming discourse" (1997), State University of New York Press
- Benoit, W. L., "Seeing spots: A functional analysis of presidential television advertisements, 1952-1996" (1996), Praeger
- Benoit, W. L., "Acclaiming, attacking, and defending in presidential nominating acceptance addresses", Quarterly Journal of Speech, 85, pp.245~267 (1999)
- Benoit, W. L., "A functional analysis of political advertising across media 1998", Communication Studies, 51, pp.274~295 (2000)
- Benoit, W. L., "The functional approach to presidential television spots: Acclaiming, attacking, and defending 1952-2000", Communication Studies, 52, pp.109~126 (2001)
- Benoit, W. L., "Framing through temporal metaphor: The 'Bridges' of Bob Dole and Bill Clinton in their 1996 acceptance addresses", Communication Studies, 52, pp.70~84 (2001)
- Benoit, W. L., "Campaign ’96: A functional analysis of acclaiming, attacking, defending discourse" (1998), State University of New York Press
- Benoit, W. L., "A functional analysis of the 1988 Bush-Dukakis presidential debates", Argumentation & Advocacy, 38, pp.28~39 (2002)
- Benoit, W. L., "Inaccuracies in media coverage of the 1996 and 2000 presidential debates", Argumentation & Advocacy, 38, pp.28~39 (2001)
- Benoit, W. L., "Functions of the great debates: Acclaims, attacks, and defenses in the 1960 presidential debates", Communication Monographs, 66, pp.341~357 (1999)
- Benoit, W. L., "Campaign 2000: A functional analysis of presidential campaign discourse" (2003), Rowman & Littlefield
- Benoit, W. L., "A functional approach to televised political spots: Acclaiming, attacking and defending", Communication Quarterly, 45, pp.1~20 (1997)
- Benoit, W. L., "Candidates in conflict: Persuasive attack and defense in the 1992 presidential debates" (1996), University of Alabama Press
- Brazeal, L. M., "A functional analysis of congressional television spots, 1986-2000", Communication Quarterly, 49, pp.436~454 (2001)
- Carlin, D. B., "Toward a theory of vice presidential debate purposes: An analysis of the 1992 vice presidential debate", Argumentation & Advocacy, 30, pp.119~131 (1993)
- Carlin, D. P., "Presidential debate ad focal points for campaign arguments", Political Communication, 9, pp.251~265 (1992)
- Carlin, D. P., "The effects of presidential debate formats on clash: A comparative analysis", Argumentation and Advocacy, 27, pp.126~136 (1991)
- Carlin, D. P., "The influence of format and questions on candidate’s strategic argument choices in the 2000 presidential debates", American Behavioral Scientist, 44, pp.2196~2218 (2001)
- Friedenberg, R. V., "Patterns and trends in national political debate 1960-1992. in: Rhetorical studies of national political debates", pp.235~251 (1994), Praeger
- Hart, R. P., "Political debate: Forms, styles, and media", American Behavioral Scientist, 40, pp.1095~1122 (1997)
- Hatfield, I. D., "The comparative utility of three types of behavioral units for interaction analysis", Communication Monographs, 45, pp.44~50 (1978)
- Hinck, E. A., "Politeness strategies in the 1992 vice presidential and presidential debates", Argumentation and Advocacy, 38, pp.234~250 (2002)
- Holsti, O. R., "Content analysis. in: Handbook of social psychology", pp.596~692 (1968), Addison-Wesley
- Joslyn, R. A., "Political advertising and the meaning of elections. in: New perspective on political advertising", pp.139~183 (1986), Southern Illinois University Press
- Kern, M., "30-second politics: Political advertising in the eighties" (1989), Praeger
- Kim, C. S., "A functional analysis of Korean presidential advertisements, 2002", Journal of advertising, 59, pp.25~48 (2003)
- 김춘식, "1997년 대통령선거 후보자의 텔레비전 토론 수사 분석", 언론과학연구, 6(1), pp.75~114 (2006), 한국지역언론학회
- Kim, C. S., "A functional analysis of the 2002 Korean presidential debates", Studies of Broadcasting Culture, 16, pp.139~171 (2004)
- Kim, I. Y., "Argumentation strategies of the participants for the 15th and 16th Korean presidential TV debate", Speech & Communication, 2, pp.7~40 (2003)
- 김관규, "2007년(제17대) 대통령선거 TV토론의 설득적 전략 분석", 언론과학연구, 8(2), pp.51~83 (2008), 한국지역언론학회
- 김관규, "TV토론에서의 후보 지지도와 토론 포맷에 따른설득 전략의 차이설득적 공격과 방어를 중심으로", 한국방송학보, 21(3), pp.122~162 (2007), 한국방송학회
- Lee, C., "A functional analysis of the 2002 Korean presidential debates", Asian Journal of Communication, 15, pp.115~132 (2005)
- 이수범, "TV토론에 나타난 후보자들의 설득전략 연구: 2006년 서울시장 TV토론을 중심으로", 스피치와 커뮤니케이션, 7(7), pp.38~75 (2007), 한국소통학회
- Martel, M., "Political campaign debates: Images, strategies, and tactics" (1983), Longman Press
- Morris, E. R., "A clash strategy analysis of contemporary general election presidential debates" (2004), University of Kansas
- Reber, B. H., "Presidential debate stories accentuate the negative", Newspaper Research Journal, 22, pp.30~43 (2001)
- Ritter, K., "Televised Presidential Primary Debates: A New National Forum for Political Debating", Journal of the American Forensic Association, 23, pp.1~14 (1986)
- Song, J. G., "Culture, politics and television: A cross-cultural comparative study of Korean and U.S. televised presidential debates", 박사, pp.2000
- 송종길, "대통령후보 TV합동토론 형식(Format) 비교 연구-대통령선거방송토론위원회 주최 합동토론회를 중심으로", 한국언론정보학보, 22, pp.107~130 (2003), 한국언론정보학회
- 송종길, "2002년 대통령후보 텔레비전 토론에서 나타난 수사학적 토론전략 연구: 후보자의 설득적 공격과 방어전략 분석을 중심으로", 한국언론학보, 48(2), pp.108~137 (2004), 한국언론학회
- 송종길, "2002년 민주당·한나라당 대통령 후보 경선 TV토론에서 나타난 토론방식(format) 비교연구", 한국방송학보, 16(4), pp.140~173 (2002), 한국방송학회
- Surlin, L. C., "How values affect attitudes toward direct reference political advertising", Journalism Quarterly, 54, pp.89~98 (1977)
- The Racine Group, "White Paper on Televised Political Campaign Debates", Argumentation and Advocacy, 38, pp.199~218 (2002)
- Trent, J. S., "Political campaign communication: Principles and practices" (1995), Praeger
- Wells, W. T., "An analysis of attacking, acclaiming, and defending strategies in the 1976-1984 presidential debates", 박사, pp.1999