 Lawrence N.

Berlin and Anita Fetzer

political discourse articulates together the orders of discourse of the political sys-
tem (conventional, official politics), of the media, of science and technology, of
grassroots sociopolitical movements, of ordinary private life, and so forth – but in
an unstable and shifting configuration.” What is of relevance is the fact that the
expert status interacts with the other constitutive systems of discourse identity,
namely social class, gender and cultural membership.
Due to the complexity of interdependent first- and second-frame (or media
frame) interactions and the complexity of professional and expert discourse iden-
tities, the media message is neither intended at face value, nor can it be taken at
face value. Rather, it requires recontextualization, which “entails transformation”
(Fairclough 1998: 149). This is not only reflected in political media discourse as
such, but also in the forms or format employed in that particular context, that is
genres, in which the messages are transported in order to be transmitted, as has
been shown by Fairclough (1998: 151):
Political interviews typically mix their genres and their discourses. In complex
ways, politicians characteristically shift into conversational genre, and draw upon
lifeworld discourses, in finding ways to address mass audiences who are listening
or watching in mainly domestic environments. A particular articulation of genres
and discourses within a generic complex is a particular effect of power corre-
sponding to a particular state of hegemonic relations. It is also a potential focus
for resistance and struggle. To take an example, not all professional politicians are
willing to go along with more aggressive and contestatory styles of political inter-
view which fit in with the media priorities to make programs more entertaining
by subordinating political discussion to gladiatorial contest.

3. Politics as interaction
Copyright © 2012. John Benjamins Publishing Company. All rights reserved.

Politics as interaction suggests that a relative degree of exchange occurs between

parties (e.g., politicians and the people, politicians and the media) in a variety of
forms. While the degree to which these interactions can be seen as truly interac-
tive (i.e., politicians are attending to the interests and desires of constituents rather
than merely attending to their own political aims), the placement of the following
contributions on the interaction side of the continuum underscores their funda-
mental nature as being open to – if only in appearance – the inclusion of voices
and opinions outside the traditional political sphere of those in the government to
those for whom the government is intended: the people. The interaction and re-
spective plans for cooperative group action also include the media when it func-
tions as a representative of the people striving to protect them against any form of

Berlin, L. N., & Fetzer, A. (Eds.). (2012). Dialogue in politics. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Created from dalarna on 2023-07-31 19:02:49.
 Dialogue in politics 

complete governmental control (i.e., the media as either a forum for mediated dia-
logue or the “fourth estate” in a checks and balances system).
In his comparative analysis of discussion lists, Ensink (this volume) presents
examples of online newspaper sources as providing a forum for political interac-
tion. The lists vary in terms of (1) degrees of direction or the amount of priming
created by the media source itself toward a specific direction of talk; (2) degrees of
moderation or the amount of control exerted by the newspaper in monitoring
postings; and (3) degrees of organization from more to less structured with re-
gards to a particular point of view, pro or con. As an alterative to traditional forms
of print news media, the format of the online discussion list gives the appearance
of availing readers with direct input into the events unfolding within society, a
direct line to the political pulse.
Expanding on the use of online news media to create a mediated political dia-
logue, Johansson (this volume) examines the use of video in digital news sources.
Her contribution explores the use of video from two ends of the continuum: the
institutional and the societal. As such, the reader is given a broad perspective on
the ability of enhanced digital media when text is juxtaposed with video to rein-
force a particular political stance or institutional viewpoint, or to propose alterna-
tive viewpoints to the extent that they may function as a counter political discourse.
Asserting that “every dialogue is based on mediation” (48), then, Johansson (63)
presents a form of political dialogue that emergent, hybrid, transformative, and
inherently interactive as “readers and viewers are no longer only passive recipients
of the news, but are engaged in the judging of events, facts, or opinions reported
to them.”
Changing focus from media as a forum for political interaction to media as a
participant, we come to the question regarding what the role of journalists should
be when they interview politicians, one of guardian of the public trust or one of
Copyright © 2012. John Benjamins Publishing Company. All rights reserved.

instigator to gain ratings. In Bull’s contribution to the volume, “Watch dogs or

guard dogs? Adversarial discourse in political journalism”, he reflects on the his-
torical changes that have led journalists to take a more combative stance in their
interviews with politicians. Taking a ranking of face threats as a measure, Bull ef-
fectively traces how the divestiture of media monopolies, the need to compete for
ratings, and the increased mediatization of political campaigns ultimately has led
media sources to pursue a “no holds barred” approach to political journalism
making dialogue between reporters and politicians more conflictive than coopera-
tive, and more attacking than supportive of any type of cooperative group action.
Yet in this strange contest of interaction cum entertainment (Fairclough 1995)
where it seems that both parties rely on and use each other in order to make “good
television”, Bull leaves us with the question of whether this increasingly aggressive

Berlin, L. N., & Fetzer, A. (Eds.). (2012). Dialogue in politics. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Created from dalarna on 2023-07-31 19:02:49.
  Lawrence N. Berlin and Anita Fetzer

approach to political reporting may be the cause of the public’s increasing disen-
chantment with politics and politicians.
The next chapter by Minow explores another aspect of the mediatization of
politics – televised debates – through the lens of positioning theory (Davies and
Harré 1990, Harré and van Langenhove 1991). Through the juxtaposition of vari-
ous types of debates in various forums, Minow applies the use of primarily first
and second order positioning to investigate how politicians situate themselves and
their opponents within the dialogic interaction in order to gain an advantage. Ul-
timately, in order to characterize themselves as competent for the job they seek,
politicians during a campaign must simultaneously give the impression of their
opponents as unfit while not directly attacking them, a tactic which may have neg-
ative repercussions for the attacker. Thus, televised debates become a form of po-
litical dialogue which is highly stylized and predicated on the politician’s ability to
read audience reaction. Ultimately, then, while the focus on participants engaging
in political debates is still essentially interactive, their performances possess a per-
suasive aspect on the overhearers: the viewing and listening audience. That is, the
politician who emerges as the perceived winner of the debate has effectively con-
vinced overhearers of his suitability for the post being sought.
Dosev’s contribution entitled “Personal Marketing and Political Rhetoric”
continues the exploration of politicians’ self-depiction. Taking the notion to the
specific case of candidates for the office of the mayor of Sofia, Bulgaria in 2005, he
traces how dialectal differences and the use of metaphors created an impression on
the public which contributed to the outcome of the mayoral race. Herein, the par-
ticular findings – dialectal differences and metaphors – of the application of
personal marketing in context fulfills Weigand’s (2009: 346) claim that “We use
empirical means such as utterances and gestures and cognitive means such as our
background knowledge and inferences to arrive at an understanding of the com-
Copyright © 2012. John Benjamins Publishing Company. All rights reserved.

plex whole.”
In the next and final chapter in this section, we see a form of politics in inter-
action that presents a unique interpretation of dialogue. In his exploration of “mo-
tions of support”, Anchimbe (this volume) discusses a unique form of written
communication from his native Cameroon which is still dialogic in nature, given
that the notes sent by citizens (i.e., initiative) are received and acted upon by the
president (i.e., response). As such, these “motions” are forms of direct political
interaction between the public and the politician. Anchimbe details the functions
of the motions which are intended for far more than merely expressing support for
the president; they are attempts to curry favor, ultimately seeking to maintain or
achieve continued support from the president in terms of the granting of an office,
the financing of a project, the bestowing of some other special recognition or pow-
er, etc. In this way, it can be said that the generation of a motion of support is

Berlin, L. N., & Fetzer, A. (Eds.). (2012). Dialogue in politics. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Created from dalarna on 2023-07-31 19:02:49.