Covering Trump’s ‘Carnival’: A Rhetorical Alternative to ‘Objective’ Reporting

Parks, Perry

doi:10.1080/17512786.2019.1577696

Cited by 15 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Physically attending a rally-as opposed to listening to a report about the event covered by the national media-produces a greater sense of legitimacy for the positions being espoused by the speaker because of the many supporters in attendance combined with a greater sense of excitement as a result of the party-like atmosphere at the rallies. Media reports revealed that Trump rallies tended to follow a similar format of "spectacle" more akin to a sporting event than a political meeting (Hall, Goldstein, and Ingram 2016), where the audience is encouraged to cheer and boo as Trump "voluminously belittled and mocked his enemies in politics, government, and the press" (Parks 2019). Furthermore, many rallies featured specific calls to action by Trump to attendees.…”

Section: Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Trump Effect: How 2016 Campaign Rallies Explain Spikes in Hate

Feinberg

Branton

Martinez‐Ebers

2022

APSC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The 2016 Trump campaign held more than 300 rallies. Our research examines whether these rallies and Trump’s rhetoric served as opportunities for the spread of hate. We measured the number of reported white-supremacist propaganda, anti-Semitic incidents, and extremist behaviors that occurred both leading up to and directly following these campaign events. We contend that Trump’s rhetoric and rallies increased the perceived threat facing white Americans, heightening their white identity, all while justifying violence and extralegal methods to address their grievances and thereby increasing reported bias incidents. We find that counties that hosted a Trump rally experienced an increase in hate-motivated events. We systematically show that Trump political rallies were associated with a limited size but significant rise in the likelihood of reported hate and bias incidents.

show abstract

Section: Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Trump Effect: How 2016 Campaign Rallies Explain Spikes in Hate

Feinberg

Branton

Martinez‐Ebers

2022

APSC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We acknowledge that the term is also used in cultural studies and media sociology to refer to ways in which journalism serves as a conduit for larger ideological forces. For example, recent work addressed how journalistic norms can aid in the normalization of right-wing populist candidacies in the Americas (Parks 2019;Araújo and Prior 2020).…”

Section: Normalizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tweeting Outside the Lines: Normalization and Fragmentation as Political Reporters Break from the Mainstream

Mourão

Molyneux

2020

Journalism Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The field of journalism is experiencing intense diversification in form and message while trying to overcome widespread public disaffection by reinforcing professional norms. This study focuses on two forces-normalization and fragmentation-by observing them at work on social media. We analyzed content and interactions from mainstream and non-mainstream political journalists covering a 2016 U.S. presidential debate. Forces of normalization would draw these two groups of reporters together in a monolithic, widespread practice, perhaps including both newer and older methods. Forces of fragmentation, on the other hand, would drive groups of practitioners further apart, with clearer lines separating mainstream journalism from its offshoots. The key question is where these similarities and differences between mainstream and non-mainstream journalists arise. Findings suggest divergence in objectivity and gatekeeping, and convergence in campaign coverage practices. The evidence suggests that, on Twitter, mainstream reporters insulate themselves by interacting mainly with other journalists, while nonmainstream journalists offer openly partisan interpretations and seek out audience participation and engagement, often from people sharing their viewpoints.

show abstract

“…It seems reasonable to assume that by directly quoting these passages, journalists supposedly hoped to expose the racist ideology that Forum members have, without 'translating' them into a more mainstream type of rhetoric like US journalists did with Trump (see Parks, 2019). At the same time, however, by providing extensive quotes and some of the eugenic justifications without criticising the underlying racism (which actually would have been in line with the objectivity paradigm), the reports ended up disseminating the FvD's racist rhetoric (AD 6 February 2021).…”

Section: Mensen (People) Clustermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a similar vein, media practitioners can accommodate the far right by focussing extensively on issues that are ‘owned’ by these parties, notably issues pertaining to nationalism, immigration and crime-related topics (see Boomgaarden and Vliegenthart, 2007). Crucially, accommodation can also occur when journalists blindly adhere to the ‘objectivity paradigm’, which is implies embracing longstanding journalistic norms, including detachment, nonpartisanship and balance, under which reporters refrain from revealing their personal point of view, provide informed assertions based on knowledge and experience, or cast doubt on depicted viewpoints without appealing to a contravening source (Parks, 2019: 1165). The accommodation strategy is broadly in-line with Wodak’s interpretation of normalisation, where populist radical right actors are allowed to gradually push the boundaries of what is deemed acceptable by employing discursive strategies such as scapegoating and fearmongering (Krzyżanowski, 2020b).…”

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

The normalisation of the far right in the Dutch media in the run-up to the 2021 general elections

Jonge

Gaufman

2022

Discourse & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although there is widespread agreement in the literature that the media play an instrumental role in furthering or limiting the spread of right-wing populism, there are few studies that examine the micro-mechanisms at play that facilitate the normalisation of the far right in and by the media. This contribution seeks to redress that gap. Focussing in particular on the Netherlands, we trace the ways in which the media have accommodated populist radical right politicians and their parties in the run-up to the 2021 Dutch general elections, thereby discursively shifting the boundaries of what is considered appropriate or ‘normal’. We do so by concentrating on the far-right political newcomer, Thierry Baudet, who is the leader of the Forum voor Democratie (Forum for Democracy or FvD, also referred to as Forum). Using discourse-conceptual analysis of Dutch newspaper articles, the article provides illustrative evidence that Dutch mainstream media outlets adopted an accommodative stance towards Baudet and his party in the run-up to the elections. The findings suggest that this media strategy contributed to the normalisation of the far right in the Dutch public sphere.

show abstract

Covering Trump’s ‘Carnival’: A Rhetorical Alternative to ‘Objective’ Reporting

Cited by 15 publications

References 20 publications

The Trump Effect: How 2016 Campaign Rallies Explain Spikes in Hate

The Trump Effect: How 2016 Campaign Rallies Explain Spikes in Hate

Tweeting Outside the Lines: Normalization and Fragmentation as Political Reporters Break from the Mainstream

The normalisation of the far right in the Dutch media in the run-up to the 2021 general elections

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About