The Major Addresses of Modern Presidents: Parameters of a Data Set

Abstract

The president is the American people's one authentic trumpet, and he has no higher duty than to give a clear and certain sound. --Clinton Rossiter, The American Presidency (1960) If scholars of political communication were asked to identify the single figure who has drawn the most attention from their research community, the president of the United States of America would undoubtedly be their choice. Today and throughout history, the person of the president, the causes and consequences of presidential action, and the role of the executive branch in American government have been the deserving objects of extensive scholarly interest. Perhaps the single most prominent strain of research on the presidency, at least in the discipline of communication, is the study of presidential rhetoric. Countless studies have examined speeches of individual presidents (for reviews, see Aune and Medhurst 2008; Stuckey and Antczak 1998), and a smaller but still substantial body of research has tracked broader trends in presidential speech over time (e.g., Campbell and Jamieson 2008; Domke and Coe 2008; Hart 1984; Lira 2008; Shogan 2006; Teten 2003). Studies that fall into this latter category--longitudinal analyses of presidential discourse--inevitably wrestle with a difficult issue: which presidential speeches should be analyzed? Deciding to focus on certain speeches rather than others plays a key role in determining what content patterns the analysis is likely to reveal, so one hopes decisions about speech selection are made carefully in the context of each study. One might also reasonably hope, however, that some understanding would emerge as to what body of speeches provides a broad, valid depiction of the content of presidential discourse over time. Surprisingly, there has been essentially no interrogation of this issue. Studies vary in the speeches they analyze: some focus on inaugural addresses, others on State of the Union addresses, yet others focus on some broader body of speeches, often with little or no discussion of the criteria used for selection. The result is that when scholars set out to study broad trends in the rhetoric of America's most important political figure, they have little guidance in determining what speeches they should analyze. This article aims to provide such guidance. We offer a detailed conception of major presidential addresses and argue that such addresses provide an ideal corpus of texts for longitudinal content analysis of modern presidential speech. Rather than analyzing data to answer research questions or test hypotheses, this project provides scholars of presidential communication with a resource that might make them better able to answer research questions and test hypotheses going forward. In particular, this article benefits future research in two ways: (1) it offers clear criteria for inclusion and exclusion of speeches so that scholars can make fully informed decisions about the merits of this definition of major presidential addresses and (2) it facilitates analyses of presidential discourse that are standardized so that more meaningful generalizations can be made and more precise replications can be undertaken. Studying Modern Presidential Rhetoric The study of presidential rhetoric is central to the field of political communication for good reason: presidents exist in the public imagination largely through their words. Truly, communicating with the public is one of the central functions--some would say the central function--of the modern presidency. [A] virtual 'rhetorical branch' exists within the executive branch: an arsenal of speeches, symbolism, and myriad institutional and communication resources at the presidents' disposal to advance domestic and foreign policy (Yenerall 2006, 147). These communications should not be taken lightly. The presidency is a national symbol, and presidential communications are the primary means through which the symbolic power of the office is produced and maintained (Campbell and Jamieson 2008; Hinckley 1990). …