Favorable Opportunity Structures for Populist Communication: Comparing Different Types of Politicians and Issues in Social Media, Television and the Press

Ernst, Nicole; Esser, Frank; Blassnig, Sina; Engesser, Sven

doi:10.1177/1940161218819430

Cited by 82 publications

(89 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In country clusters where scapegoats are most accessible in receivers' schemata, populist blame attributions should thus be most effective. These findings support the notion that populist communication is most effective when it resonates with real-life, contextuallevel opportunity structures (e.g., Aalberg et al, 2017;Ernst, Esser, Blassnig, & Engesser, 2018;Reinemann et al, 2019).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

Widening the Divide between Them and Us? The Effects of Populist Communication on Cognitive and Affective Stereotyping in a Comparative European Setting

Hameleers

Fawzi

2020

Political Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To explain the global spread and electoral success of populist rhetoric, a growing body of research has investigated the content and effects of populist communication. Extant research has shown that right-wing populist communication can activate negative stereotypical portrayals toward the populist out-group. Yet, we know too little about how exposure to populist ideas can widen the perceived cognitive and affective divide between the people and others in different European regions, although this Manichean view of inand out-groups is at the core of populist ideology. Against this backdrop, we rely on a comparative experimental study in Western, Eastern, and Southern European regions to investigate how exposure to right-wing populist communication can activate the perceived divide between the ordinary people vis-à-vis the elites and immigrants. Our main findings demonstrate that populist communication in some cases widens the cognitive and emotional divide between the people and the populist out-groups, but the magnitude of the effects is small, and we do not find systematic patterns corresponding to regions. Nevertheless, our results have important implications for understanding the impact of populism on the cultivation of polarized divides in a diversified European region. Populist communication may augment societal divides, but these effects are spread across countries and only triggered by some elements of the ideational core of populism.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

Widening the Divide between Them and Us? The Effects of Populist Communication on Cognitive and Affective Stereotyping in a Comparative European Setting

Hameleers

Fawzi

2020

Political Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As our conceptualization relied on the "ideational approach," which bears good operationalizability (Mudde, 2017: 39), we are confident that the key elements and principles of sciencerelated populism can be usefully translated into survey scales, coding schemes for standardized content analyses, or qualitative approaches to text, corpus, or discourse analysissimilar to those that have been developed for measurements of political populism (e.g. Ernst et al, 2019;Hameleers, 2019;Schulz et al, 2018). This would allow for comprehensive investigations of individuals' science-related populist attitudes (the "demand side" of science-related populism) and science-related populist communication of public figures and organizations (the "supply side").…”

Section: Science-related Populism and Its Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Science-related populism: Conceptualizing populist demands toward science

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Populism is on the rise in many countries. Scholars have stated that it is characteristic for political populism to describe society as a fundamental struggle between an allegedly virtuous people and political elites which are portrayed negatively. This anti-elitist sentiment not only targets politicians, however, but also other representatives of the alleged establishment—including scientists and scholarly institutions. But the specifics of such science-related populism have not yet been conceptualized. We aim to do so, integrating scholarship on political populism, the “participatory turn,” and alternative epistemologies. We propose to conceptualize science-related populism as a set of ideas which suggests that there is a morally charged antagonism between an (allegedly) virtuous ordinary people and an (allegedly) unvirtuous academic elite, and that this antagonism is due to the elite illegitimately claiming and the people legitimately demanding both science-related decision-making sovereignty and truth-speaking sovereignty.

show abstract

“…Since a huge amount of speeches and debates are involved in presidential campaigns, language is a key element during the election period. Many researchers have actually identified that language is a powerful weapon for the success of many politicians (Tenorio, 2002;Ricks, 2018;Ernst, Esser, Blassnig, & Engesser, 2019). In view of that, the research aims to compare the two candidates' language styles to dig out the secret of Trump's incredible victory over Clinton.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Typical Politician vs. a Lunatic Businessman: Different Language Styles of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump

Zhao¹,

Wu²,

Zhang³

2020

IJEL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The victory of Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton in the 2016 US election shocked the media and the public around the world. In an attempt to understand the linguistic differences between Clinton and Trump that might explain the unexpected result, both quantitative and qualitative methods were used in the research to analyze their particular language features in the speeches and different strategies employed in their debates. The quantitative result showed that Trump’s language was not as rich as Clinton’s. And in terms of the qualitative analysis, it was found that Clinton tended to use the pronoun you more than Trump and that both of them were inclined to make frequent use of we in their campaign speeches. As for debate strategies, Trump, compared with Clinton, was more likely to interrupt and repeat for the purpose of showing power and leaving the audience a stronger impression. The research offers insights into Trump’s and Clinton’s linguistic features and debate strategies that might account for Trump’s victory in the election.

show abstract

Favorable Opportunity Structures for Populist Communication: Comparing Different Types of Politicians and Issues in Social Media, Television and the Press

Cited by 82 publications

References 43 publications

Widening the Divide between Them and Us? The Effects of Populist Communication on Cognitive and Affective Stereotyping in a Comparative European Setting

Widening the Divide between Them and Us? The Effects of Populist Communication on Cognitive and Affective Stereotyping in a Comparative European Setting

Science-related populism: Conceptualizing populist demands toward science

A Typical Politician vs. a Lunatic Businessman: Different Language Styles of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About