(Pseudo-)Argumentation in TV-debates

Hess-Lüttich, Ernest W.B.

doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2007.04.008

Cited by 40 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There are, however, many different types of talk shows (cf. Munson 1993;Richardson & Meinhof 1999;Gregori Signes 2000;Hess-Lüttich 2007;García Gómez 2008;Cebrián Herreros 1998) that have borrowed from diverse formats. Munson (1993: 7) highlights this when he says with reference to American television, that "[t]he talkshow 'genre' … has come to assume many 'messy,' hybridi ed variations in the thousands of talkshows that air locally and nationallyeven internationallyin any given week" Carbaugh (1988), for example, distinguishes between two basic categories: Issueand personality-centred talk shows.…”

Section: Vct Vis-à-vis Other Talk Showsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Televised talk shows have a rather long history particularly in American, British and German television, dating back to the 1970s or perhaps even earlier (cf. Gregori Signes 2000;Hess-Lüttich 2007). 2 The last 20 years or so, however, have seen, as we know, the growth of a subgenre of audience-driven talk shows (and other programmes) that have one key feature in commonspectacle as the basis for the entertainment offered -and spectacle in these talk shows is most often to be found in "the emphasis upon display, revelation, shock, and confrontation" (Richardson & Meinhof 1999: 131-132) (see also, among others, Brenes Peña 2011;Culpeper 2005;Gamboa Cetina 2001;Lorenzo-Dus 2009).…”

Section: Introduction and Aimsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

In between spectacle and political correctness

Placencia¹,

Rodríguez²

2022

PRAG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vamos con todois a mixed-genre entertainment programme transmitted in Ecuador on a national television channel. The segment of the programme that we examine in this paper focuses on gossip and events surrounding local/national celebrities. Talk as entertainment is central to this segment which is structured around a series of ‘news’ stories announced by the presenters and mostly conveyed through (pre-recorded) interviews. Extracts of these interviews are ingeniously presented to create a sense of confrontation between the celebrities concerned. Each news story is then followed-up by informal ‘discussions’ among the show’s 5-6 presenters who take on the role of panellists. WhileVamos con todoincorporates various genres, the running thread throughout the programme is the creation of scandal and the instigation of confrontation. What is of particular interest, however, is that no sooner the scandalous stories are presented, the programme presenters attempt to defuse the scandal and controversy that they contributed to creating. The programme thus results in what viewers familiar with the genre of confrontational talk shows in Spain, for example, may regard as an emasculated equivalent. In this paper we explore linguistic and other mechanisms through which confrontation and scandal are first created and then defused inVamos con todo. We consider the situational, cultural and socio-political context of the programme as possibly playing a part in this disjointedness. The study draws on the literature on television discourse, talk shows and (im)politeness in the media.

show abstract

Section: Vct Vis-à-vis Other Talk Showsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introduction and Aimsmentioning

confidence: 99%

In between spectacle and political correctness

Placencia¹,

Rodríguez²

2022

PRAG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Discussion on Q&A takes the form of ‘show conversations’, with the central protagonists ‘performing’ for the two audiences, as enemies ‘cooperating’ in ‘pseudo’ debate (Hess-Luttich, 2007: 1362). Mining billionaire, Clive Palmer exemplifies ‘performance’ of this kind, with an appeal to pathos to win audience support: ‘We’ve got the developed world telling the undeveloped world they can’t have what they’ve got, that they can’t have a lifestyle the same as them and that’s wrong’.…”

Section: The Public Affairs Talk Showmentioning

confidence: 99%

Representing climate change on public service television: A case study

Debrett

2015

Public Underst Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Publicly funded broadcasters with a track record in science programming would appear ideally placed to represent climate change to the lay public. Free from the constraints of vested interests and the economic imperative, public service providers are better equipped to represent the scientific, social and economic aspects of climate change than commercial media, where ownership conglomeration, corporate lobbyists and online competition have driven increasingly tabloid coverage with an emphasis on controversy. This prime-time snapshot of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation's main television channel explores how the structural/rhetorical conventions of three established public service genres - a science programme, a documentary and a live public affairs talk show - impact on the representation of anthropogenic climate change. The study findings note implications for public trust, and discuss possibilities for innovation in the interests of better public understanding of climate change.

show abstract

“…The former refers to the interests of the political message and the latter is related to the interests of political motivation, i.e the intention and political calculations [1]. As such, Hess-Luttich (2007) account that political debate is a double games, both presenting rational arguments and avoiding it at the same time [2].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Argumentum ad Hominem in Presidential Candidate’s Debate in Indonesia: Forms and Functions

Jazeri¹,

Sukarsono²,

Sumarti³

2019

Proceedings of the Proceedings of the 1st Seminar and Workshop on Research Design, for Education, Social Science, Arts, and Hum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In formal logic, ad hominem argument is fallacius, but in political debate, such argument frequently occurs. This study aims to describe the forms, message, and motivation in using argumentum ad hominem in the dabate of presidential candidates in Indonesia. This study is qualitatively approached by using pragmatics framework. The data were collected through documentation technique, derived from the broadcasted debates of presidential candidates on TV in 2019. The collected data were analyzed by the interactive model of Miles dan Huberman. Considering the fact that the arguments in political debate contains a variety of interests, the researchers applied message analysis coined by Vedung, comprising two steps, namely content analysis and function analysis. Based on data analysis, the study discovers some findings as follow; first, argumentum ad hominem practiced in the debate can be categorized into three functions, i.e.: (1) attacking the debate opponent, (2) attacking the party of debate opponent, and (3) attacking the supporters of the debate opponent. The political motivations of using argumentum ad hominem in the debate are: (1) judging or criticizing the debate opponent's ideas, (2) cornering the debate opponent.

show abstract

(Pseudo-)Argumentation in TV-debates

Cited by 40 publications

References 1 publication

In between spectacle and political correctness

In between spectacle and political correctness

Representing climate change on public service television: A case study

Argumentum ad Hominem in Presidential Candidate’s Debate in Indonesia: Forms and Functions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About