Abstract
Innovative media forums like Pastor Rick Warren's 2008 interviews with the major party nominees challenge US journalism's institutional authority to mediate public political discourse. Journalists reacted to Warren's forum by re-envisioning their institutional authority as authenticating the political. Others might have public conversations with politicians, but only journalism rendered such conversations political, that is, suitable for democratic decision-making. Claiming journalism's prerogative to generate authentically political discourse, they transformed the forum into “news.” They positioned it as mere preview to the more traditionally journalistic forum of the presidential debates, transformed forum discourse grounded in evangelical concepts of testimony and redemption into a news discourse of strategy and hypocrisy, and situated themselves as necessary mediators helping citizens discern what was truly political about Warren's forum. Although journalists could not avoid Warren's public criticism of their specific practices, their claims of institutional authority to define political discourse and to discipline and rehabilitate discourse that did not meet the standard were not contested.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
