Abstract

Speaker-audience interaction in political speeches has been conceptualised as a form of dialogue between speaker and audience. Of particular importance is research pioneered by Atkinson (e.g., 1983, 1984a, 1984b) on the analysis of rhetorical devices utilised by politicians to invite audience applause. Atkinson was not concerned with emotionalisation in political speech-making, rather with how applause was invited in relation to group identities through ingroup praise and/or outgroup derogation. However, his theory has provided important insights into how speakers invite audience responses, and a powerful stimulus for associated research. The purpose of this article is to address the shortfall of emotionalisation research within the realm of political speeches. We begin with an account of Atkinsons influential theory of rhetoric, followed by a relevant critique. The focus then turns to our main aim, namely, how key findings from previous speech research can be interpreted in terms of emotionalisation. Specifically, the focus is on audience responses to the words of political speakers, and how different forms of response may reflect audience emotionality. It is proposed that both duration and frequency of invited affiliative audience responses may indicate more positive emotional audience responses, while uninvited interruptive audience applause and booing may provide notable clues to issues on which audiences have strong feelings. It is concluded that there is strong evidence that both invited and uninvited audience responses may provide important clues to emotionalisation - both positive and negative - in political speeches.

Highlights

  • Oratory has always been an important form of political communication, its study dating back to the ancient civilisations of Greece and Rome

  • Whilst oratory was traditionally regarded as monologic, a central finding from this substantial body of research concerns the role of audiences in a two-way interchange

  • Heritage and Greatbatch’s (1986) analysis was based on all 476 speeches from the conferences of the three main political parties (Conservative, Labour, and Liberal) broadcast on British television in 1981. They found contrasts to be associated with one third of the incidents of collective applause during speeches, and lists with 12.6%; almost half of the applause was associated with the two main rhetorical devices (RDs) identified originally by Atkinson (1983, 1984a, 1984b)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Oratory has always been an important form of political communication, its study dating back to the ancient civilisations of Greece and Rome. On speaker-audience interaction has shown how political speeches can be conceptualised as a form of dialogue between speaker and audience. Of particular importance is research focused on rhetorical techniques utilised by politicians to invite audience applause, pioneered by Atkinson (e.g., 1983, 1984a, 1984b). His theory of rhetoric is reported, which includes a critique based on subsequent related research.

Atkinson’s theory of rhetoric and its critique
Critique of Atkinson’s theory
Emotionalisation in audience responses
Affiliative responses
Booing
Findings
Conclusions
Full Text
Published version (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