Abstract
The rhetoric of then U.S. President‐elect Donald Trump and Philippines' President Rodrigo Duterte had triggered a shift in global political discourse (Greene, ). This study examines their responses on three similar crises: disrespectful remarks towards women, associations with controversial political figures, and remarks threatening geopolitical relations. Data from prestige publications, Washington Post (U.S.) and the Philippine Daily Inquirer, were analyzed during the acute stage of each crisis. Findings showed that both men employed confusing strategy combinations in their crisis responses. Despite incoherent application and contradictory strategies, they survived threats to their image as evidenced by poll results. New strategies (diversion and logorrhea) and a strategy amplifier (machismo) were uncovered. These strategies tapped on ambiguity and were found to be successfully employed in a post‐truth landscape. This study builds on Benoit's () argument that “any attempt by a president to repair a damaged image … clearly merits scholarly attention” (p. 138).
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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 call
