Framing, resonance and war: Foregrounds and backgrounds of cultural congruence

Kornprobst, Markus

doi:10.1177/1354066117741675

Cited by 8 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 68 publications

(75 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In other words, Bush and Trump successfully promoted their nominee through episodic framing because it was culturally congruent Kornprobst, 2019) to rape culture narratives (Buchwald et al, 1993;Payne et al, 1999;Weiss, 2009). Though not frequently used for Hill, thematically, Trump and Republican politicians also shifted attention away from sexual abuse to the "danger" addressing Blasey Ford's testimony posed to US judicial and political systems.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Examining the cascade model during the news coverage of Anita Hill and Christine Blasey Ford showed Presidents Bush and Trump successfully introduced news framing, which Republican politicians repeated, and the opposition contested. Thematically and episodically, the confirmation side during the Hill case relied on the patriarchy to promote their candidate and during the Blasey Ford case, it was still culturally congruent for Republican politicians to do the same Kornprobst, 2019) -even if there was greater opposition. The ambiguity in the news coverage ultimately protected powerful actors, especially the presidents, from direct challenge.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In order for elites to promote their frames through the cascade model effectively, their messages are usually based on preexisting ideas, which are described in framing research as culturally congruent (Entman, 2004;Kornprobst, 2019). How Bush and Trump promoted their SCOTUS nominee quickly changed after the testimonies of Hill and Blasey Ford.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Presidential framing in the Christine Blasey Ford and Anita Hill cases

Blumell

2020

The Communication Review

View full text Add to dashboard

Anita Hill's testimony against Clarence Thomas in 1991 called attention to widespread sexual abuse in the US. Testimony from Christine Blasey Ford against Thomas Kavanaugh 27 years later underscored the lack of progress in its eradication. Using the cascading network activation model, this study identifies the episodic and thematic framing of both cases in relation to top down influencers. A content analysis (N = 901) of US newspapers and TV networks showed episodic framing dominated coverage in both cases. Both Bush and Trump successfully emphasized their nominee as deserving of SCOTUS. Trump also significantly contributed to the negative framing of Blasey Ford. Thematically, Republican-led framing focused on American values and maintaining the rule of law, whereas Democratic-led framing concentrated on raising awareness to the systemic problem of sexual abuse and threat the nominee posed to progressive rights. News coverage included challenging both presidents, but only for a total of 15.9% for Trump and 10.7% for Bush. On the other hand, Hill was challenged in 40.5% and Blasey Ford in 73% of news coverage. In sum, even with strong opposition, the cascade model's success indicates that White House messaging continues to usurp social justice issues. Background"This was an extremely hard thing for me to do, but I felt I couldn't NOT do it." (Vesoulis, 2018). An estimated 20.4 million viewers along with millions more online heard the words of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford during the Senate hearing for SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States) nominee Brett Kavanaugh (Reuters, 2018). Kavanaugh was a Republican nominee put forward by Donald Trump (Reuters, 2018). Blasey Ford went on to testify that when at a high school party, Kavanaugh and his friend locked her in a bedroom, pinned her down on a bed, assaulted her while covering her mouth to muffle her screams, and attempted to rape her (Vesoulis, 2018). Blasey Ford also stated that she managed to run out of the room before being raped, and that "Brett's assault on me drastically altered my life" (Vesoulis, 2018). Less than two weeks later, the US Senate confirmed Kavanaugh to SCOTUS (Daniel, Lee, & Simon, 2018).For many, the story was familiar. Nearly three decades earlier, 27 million people (Rucinski, 1993) listened to Anita Hill say in a Senate hearing for SCOTUS nominee Clarence Thomas, "It would have been more comfortable to remain silent . . . I felt that I had to tell the truth. I could not keep silent" ("Nomination of Judge Clarence Thomas," 1991). Thomas was a Republican nominee put forward by George H.W. Bush. Hill accused Thomas of sexually harassing her at work when he was in a managerial position at the Department of Education and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC, Totenberg, 2018). The US Senate also confirmed Thomas to SCOTUS (Totenberg, 2018).This study examines the framing of news coverage in the Hill and Blasey Ford cases to identify the influencers, the wider implications of the framing, and to compare and contrast both cases.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Presidential framing in the Christine Blasey Ford and Anita Hill cases

Blumell

2020

The Communication Review

View full text Add to dashboard

show abstract

“…Una estrategia frecuente es el denominado «efecto bandera», basado en el discurso patriótico y utilizado por los presidentes en acontecimientos que implican tomar decisiones impopulares, como declarar la guerra o aprobar medidas restrictivas, COVID-19 EN AMÉRICA LATINA: ESTRATEGIAS DISCURSIVAS COMPARADAS EN SISTEMAS PRESIDENCIALES [108] Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca / cc by-nc-nd América Latina Hoy, 89, 2021, pp. 105-125 invocando a la unidad con el fin de acallar las voces críticas (Kamradt-Scott y McInnes, 2012;Kornprobst, 2017). Estas estrategias no han pasado desapercibidas durante los primeros meses de gestión del COVID-19.…”

Section: Marco Teóricounclassified

COVID-19 en América Latina: estrategias discursivas comparadas en sistemas presidenciales

Fuente

2021

Am. Lat. Hoy. Rev. Cienc. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard

Este artículo estudia los marcos interpretativos utilizados por los presidentes de Argentina, Brasil, Chile y México durante los meses iniciales del COVID-19, con el objetivo de caracterizar y comparar estrategias discursivas, así como explorar qué factores explican las distintas aproximaciones. La conclusión preliminar es que las diferencias se deben tanto a razones ideológicas como a otros factores contextuales y de disponibilidad de recursos.

show abstract

“…Political actors faced with multiple competing norms of appropriateness engage in argumentation – through the logic of truth-seeking – to deliberate which norms apply under given circumstances (Risse 2000; Deitelhoff 2009). Others emphasize how rhetorical agents pick up taken-for-granted ideas from a repertoire of commonplaces and link these to new ideas through different forms of reasoning and through public justifications (Crawford 2002; Kornprobst 2007, 2017). It led to the understanding that contested norms and weak institutions favor rhetorical action (Müller 2004, 401).…”

Section: On Rhetoric and Norms In Constructivist Irmentioning

confidence: 99%

Varieties of political rhetorical reasoning: norm types, scorekeepers, and political projects

Sundaram¹

2019

Int. Theory

View full text Add to dashboard

How does rhetoric work in the pursuit of political projects in international relations? This article analyzes how rhetoric-wielding political actors engage in reasoning to bolster their position by drawing upon norms that underwrite interactions, and audiences as scorekeepers evaluate the reasoning by making a series of inferences. I call this mechanism rhetorical reasoning. Building on the existing classification of norms in constructivist international relations (IR) and utilizing three distinct norm types – instrumental, institutional, and moral – I show the different processes through which political actors deploy rhetoric to legitimize and justify political projects and the distinct logics through which scorekeepers make inferences and evaluate the project. This article contributes to IR theories of argumentation by providing a sharp conceptualization of political rhetoric and actor–audience relationships in the game. I illustrate the mechanism of rhetorical reasoning using Brazil's UN peace enforcement operation in Haiti in 2004 to give empirical evidence for the role of institutional norm type in patterns of rhetorical reasoning and contestations in international politics. Paying attention to political rhetoric in the actor–scorekeepers' relationships in this way clarifies important issues regarding the varieties of political projects and the different role of normativity in the game.

show abstract

Framing, resonance and war: Foregrounds and backgrounds of cultural congruence

Cited by 8 publications

References 68 publications

Presidential framing in the Christine Blasey Ford and Anita Hill cases

Presidential framing in the Christine Blasey Ford and Anita Hill cases

COVID-19 en América Latina: estrategias discursivas comparadas en sistemas presidenciales

Varieties of political rhetorical reasoning: norm types, scorekeepers, and political projects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About