New Conflicts in the Briefing Room: Using Sentiment Analysis to Evaluate Administration-press Relations from Clinton through Trump

Abstract

ABSTRACT Journalists have argued that the high levels of hostility between President Trump and numerous media outlets have marked a critical juncture in presidential-press relations. This perceived conflict challenges a key expectation of literatures on political media and the presidency: that functional interdependence will encourage presidential administrations to tolerate more aggressive media questioning in an effort to control media messages. We examine the interactions between U.S. presidential administrations and the White House press corps through thirty-five years of press briefing transcripts to assess the underpinnings of the current shift. We evaluate key hypotheses via a sentiment analysis using the NRC Emotional Lexicon. Generally, each side tends to reinforce, or mirror, positive and negative language of the counterparty during press briefings. However, we find a significant disjunction with the Trump Administration. Trump Administration representatives use negative language at higher rates than previous administrations and respond more sensitively to changes in press tone by decreasing positive language in response to press negativity. We discuss implications for the dynamic role of the media in shaping these changes.