Cover not available
Part of
Follow-ups in Political Discourse: Explorations across contexts and discourse domains
Edited by Elda Weizman and Anita Fetzer
[Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture 60] 2015
► pp. 169–204

Follow-ups in political talk shows and their visual framing

The chapter aims to provide corpus-analytical insights into the multimodality of political discourse in the Dutch talk show Pauw & Witteman. The show combines conversations with video clips and other visuals. Thus, it realises a macro follow-up by linking talk items to (earlier) news reports that are shown before the talk starts: talk as a ‘prolongation’ of politics. Meanwhile, video clips or stills accompany the developing conversation: they may support, contradict, confirm or soften it. We consider this screening on the go a micro follow-up constellation. It works, among other things, as visual framing of the evolving verbal discourse: it triggers the exchanges and determines their lines. A corpus analysis of one week proves the show’s multimodality that increases the meaning-making potential of socio-political media discourse and imposes visual authority on the speakers and participants. It turns out that classical interviews can remain as prominent accountability rituals (“set piece”), while additional forms of political conversation can diversify and become more fluid, such as in the way described here.
Published online: 20 August 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.60.07sau
References (75)
References
Bednarek, Monika and Helen Caple. 2012. News Discourse. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Bell, Allan. 1984. “Language Style as Audience Design.” Language in Society 13 (2): 145–204. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2001. “Back in Style: Reworking Audience Design.” In Style and Sociolinguistic Variation, ed. by Penelope Eckert and John R. Rickford, 139–196. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Breeze, Ruth. 2013. “British Media Discourses on the Wearing of Religious Symbols.” In Verbal and Visual Rhetoric in a Media World, ed. by Hilde van Belle, Paul Gillaerts, Baldwin van Gorp, Dorien van de Mieroop and Kris Rutten, 193–207. Amsterdam: Leiden University Press.Google Scholar
Bolter, Jay David and Richard Grusin. 1999. Remediation: Understanding New Media. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bubel, Claudia. 2008. “Film Audiences as Overhearers.” Journal of Pragmatics 40 (1): 55–71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bull, Peter. 2015. “Follow-Ups in Broadcast Political Discourse: Speeches, Interviews and Parliamentary Questions”. This volume.
Carter, Cynthia and Allan Stuart. 2009. “The Visual Culture of Television News.” In Using Visual Evidence, ed. by Richard Howells and Robert W. Matson, 139–152. Maidenhead: Open University Press/McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Charaudeau, Patrick. 2002. “A Communicative Conception of Discourse.” Discourse Studies 4 (3): 301–318. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. 1996. Using Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clayman, Steven and John Heritage. 2002. The News Interview: Journalists and Public Figures on the Air. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clayman, Steven. 2007. “Speaking on Behalf of the Public in Broadcast News Interviews.” In Reporting Talk. Reported Speech in Interaction, ed. by Elizabeth Holt and Rebecca Clift, 221–243. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Coleman, Renita and Stephen Banning. 2006. “Network TV News’ Affective Framing of the Presidential Candidates: Evidence for a Second Level Agenda-Setting Effect through Visual Framing.” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 83 (2): 313–328. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coleman, Renita and H. Denis Wu. 2006. “More than Words Alone: Incorporating Broadcasters’ Nonverbal Communication into the Stages of Crisis Coverage Theory – Evidence from September 11.” Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 50 (1): 1–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cullen, Richard. 2002. “Supportive Teacher Talk: The Importance of the F-Move.” ELT Journal 56 (2): 117–127. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dahinden, Urs. 2006. Framing. Eine integrative Theorie der Massenkommunikation [Framing: An integrated theory of mass communication]. Konstanz: UVK.Google Scholar
De Smedt, Eva and Kristel Vandenbrande . 2011. “Political Television Formats as Strategic Resources in Achieving Journalists’ Roles.” In Talking Politics in Broadcast Media: Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Political Interviewing, Journalism and Accountability, ed. by Mats Ekström and Marianna Patrona, 75–92. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Vreese, Claes H. 2003. Framing Europe. Television News and European Integration. Amsterdam: Aksant.Google Scholar
Ensink, Titus. 2012. “Framing as a Continual and Repetitive Process in Political Communication.” In Proceedings of the ESF Strategic Workshop on Follow-ups Across Discourse Domains: A Cross-Cultural Exploration of Their Forms and Functions, Würzburg (Germany), 31 May – 2 June 2012, ed. by Anita Fetzer, Elda Weizman and Elisabeth Reber, 58–71. Würzburg: Universität Würzburg – [online]. URL: [URL] URN: urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-71656.Google Scholar
. 2015. “Framing the Queen’s Headscarf: A Case Study on Follow-Ups in Dutch Politics.” This volume.
Entman, Robert M. 1993. “Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm.” Journal of Communication 43 (4): 51–58. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Esser, Frank, Claes H. de Vreese, Jesper Strömbäck, Peter van Aelst, Toril Aalberg, James Stanyer, Günther Lengauer, Rosa Berganza, Guido Legnante, Stylianos Papathanassopoulos, Susana Salgado, Tamir Sheafer and Carsten Reinemann. 2012. “Political Information Opportunities in Europe: A Longitudinal and Comparative Study of Thirteen Television Systems.” The International Journal of Press/Politics 17 (2): 247–274. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fetzer, Anita, Elda Weizman and Elisabeth Reber. 2012. “Introduction.” In Proceedings of the ESF Strategic Workshop on Follow-ups Across Discourse Domains: A Cross-Cultural Exploration of Their Forms and Functions, Würzburg (Germany), 31 May – 2 June 2012, ed. by Anita Fetzer, Elda Weizman and Elizabeth Reber, 3–4. Würzburg: Universität Würzburg – [online]. URL: [URL] URN: urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-71656. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fetzer, Anita and Elda Weizman. 2015. “Introduction”. This volume.
Fetzer, Anita, Weizman, Elda and Elisabeth Reber (eds). 2012. Proceedings of the ESF Strategic Workshop on Follow-ups Across Discourse Domains: A Cross-Cultural Exploration of Their Forms and Functions , Würzburg (Germany), 31 May – 2 June 2012. Würzburg: Universität Würzburg – [online]. URL: [URL] URN: urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-71656.
Fischer-Lichte, Erika. 2008. The Transformative Power of Performance: A New Aesthetics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gäbler, Bernd. 2001. “… und unseren täglichen Talk gib uns heute!” Inszenierungsstrategien, redaktionelle Dramaturgien und Rolle der TV-Polit-Talkshows. [“… and give us today our daily talk!” Production strategies, editorial dramaturgies and the role of TV political talk shows]. Frankfurt am Main: Otto Brenner Stiftung.Google Scholar
Goffman, Ervin. 1979. “Footing.” Semiotica 25 (1–2): 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1981. Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Graber, Doris. 1989. “Content and Meaning. What’s it all about?” American Behavioral Scientist 33: 144–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. On Media: Making Sense of Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Greiffenhagen, Christian. 2009. “News Interviews: Clayman and Heritage’s ‘The News Interview’.” In Doing Social Science: Evidence and Methods in Empirical Research. ed. by Fiona Devine and Sue Heath, 167–192. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Gruber, Helmut. 2015. “Intertextual References in Austrian Parliamentary Debates: Between Evaluation and Argumentation”. This volume.
Haumer, Florian and Wolfgang Donsbach. 2009. “The Rivalry of Nonverbal Cues on the Perception of Politicians by Television Viewers.” Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 53 (2): 262–279. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holly, Werner. 2015. “Bildinszenierung in Talkshows. Medienlinguistische Anmerkungen zu einer Form von ‘Bild-Sprach-Transkription.’” [Visual production of talk shows. Media-linguistic remarks on a type of ‘picture language transcription’]. In Polit-Talkshows. Interdisziplinäre Perspektiven auf ein multimodales Format [Political talk shows. Interdisciplinary perspectives on a multimodal format], ed. by Heiko Girnth and Sascha Michel, 123–144. Stuttgart: ibidem-Verlag.Google Scholar
Huls, Erica. 2013. “Politieke Partijdigheid in Talkshow-Gesprekken.” [Political Bias in Talk Show Conversations]. In Studies in Taalbeheersing 4. ed. by Ronny Boogaart and Henrike Jansen, 157–169. Assen: Van Gorcum.Google Scholar
Huls, Erica and Jasper Varwijk. 2011. “Political Bias in TV Interviews.” Discourse & Society 22 (1): 48–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hutchby, Ian. 2011. “Non-Neutrality and Argument in the Hybrid Political Interview.” Discourse Studies 13 (3): 349–365. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jakobson, Roman. 1960. “Closing Statement: Linguistics and Poetics.” In Style in Language, ed. by Thomas Sebeok, 350–377. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kee, Peter. 2012. Het Briefje van Bleker. Over Intriges op het Binnenhof, Politici, Spindoctors en Pauw en Witteman [Bleker’s Note. Parliamentary Intrigues, Politicians, Spin Doctors and Pauw and Witteman]. Amsterdam: Atlas Contact.Google Scholar
Kleijwegt, Margalith and Max van Weezel. 2011. “Op tv, of roemloos ten onder.” [On TV, or perish ingloriously]. Vrij Nederland: 17 Dec. 2011.Google Scholar
Klemm, Michael. 2015. “Wenn Politik auf Einspielfilme trifft. Zur multimodalen Argumentation in der politischen Fernsehdiskussion hart aber fair’.” [When politics meet video clips. On multimodal argumentation in the TV discussion hart aber fair]. In Polit-Talkshows. Interdisziplinäre Perspektiven auf ein multimodales Format [Political talk shows. Interdisciplinary perspectives on a multimodal format], ed. by Heiko Girnth and Sascha Michel, 97–122. Stuttgart: ibidem-Verlag.Google Scholar
Kress, Gunther. 2010. Multimodality. A Social Semiotic Approach to Contemporary Communication. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. 2004. Don’t Think of an Elephant! Know your Values and Frame the Debate. White River Junction (VT): Chelsea Green.Google Scholar
Landreville, Kristen D., R. Lance Holbert and Heather L. LaMarre. 2010. “The Influence of Late-Night TV Comedy Viewing on Political Talk: A Moderated-Mediation Model.” International Journal of Press/Politics 15 (4): 482–498. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lauerbach, Gerda. 2010. “Manoeuvring between the Political, the Personal and the Private: Talk, Image and Rhythm in TV Dialogue.” Discourse & Communication 4 (2): 125–159. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liu, Yu and Kay L. O’Halloran. 2009. “Intersemiotic Texture: Analyzing Cohesive Devices between Language and Images.” Social Semiotics 19 (4): 367–388. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matthes, Jörg. 2009. “What’s in a Frame? A Content Analysis of Media Framing Studies in the World’s Leading Communication Journals, 1990–2005.” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 86 (2): 349–367. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meinhof, Ulrike. 1994. “Double Talk in News Broadcasts.” In Media Texts: Authors and Readers ed. by David Graddol and Oliver Boyd-Barrett, 212–223. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Meyer, Thomas. 2009. “Visuelle Kommunikation und politische Öffentlichkeit”. [Visual Communication and the Political Public Sphere]. In Strategien der Visualisierung. Verbildlichung als Mittel Politischer Kommunikation [Visualisation strategies. Pictoriaism as a mean in political communication], ed. by Herfried Münkler and Jens Hacke, 53–69. Frankfurt am Main: Campus.Google Scholar
Montgomery, Martin. 2007. The Discourse of Broadcast News. A Linguistic Approach. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Neufeld, Johannes. 2008. Interaktion in politischen Talkshows. Eine Inhaltsanalyse der Formate ANNE WILL, hartaberfair und Maybrit ILLNER [Interaction in Political Talk Shows. A Content Analysis of Two Different Formats]. Frankfurt am Main: Grin. (Master Thesis, University of Mainz).Google Scholar
Nichols, Bill. 2010. Introduction to Documentary. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Second Edition.Google Scholar
Pauw, Jeroen and Paul Witteman. 2010. 4 okt. 2010 – Nieuwe lokatie Pauw & Witteman New location P & W]. [URL] (accessed 11 November 2013).
Ranta, Michael. 2011. “Stories in Pictures (and Non-Pictorial Objects): A Narratological and Cognitive Psychological Approach.” Contemporary Aesthetics 9. [URL] (accessed 11 November 2013).Google Scholar
Richardson, Kay, Katy Parry and John Corner. 2012. Political Culture and Media Genre: Beyond the News. London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Royce, Terry D. 2007. “Intersemiotic Complementarity: A Framework for Multimodal Discourse Analysis.” In New Directions in the Analysis of Multimodal Discourse, ed. by Terry D. Royce and Wendy L. Bowcher, 63–109. New Jersey: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Ruigrok, Nel, Joep Schaper, Kasper Welbers, Carina Jacobi, Pauline van der Beek and Sandra Wagemakers. 2012. Impact van Pauw en Witteman. Amsterdam: Nederlandse Nieuwsmonitor. [URL] (accessed 12 November 2013).Google Scholar
Sauer, Christoph. 2007. “Christmas Messages by Heads of State: Multimodality and Media Adaptations.” In Political Discourse in the Media, ed. by Anita Fetzer and Gerda Lauerbach, 227–273. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. “Geschwätzigkeit und Stille. Eine Problemskizze zum Filmdialog.” [Loquacity and silence. A problem sketch of filmic dialogue]. Fenster – Zeitschrift für Zeichen und Wirkung 1 (3–4): 117–141.Google Scholar
. 2010. “Hingucker und/oder Wegleser. Niederländische Pressebilder (fast) ohne Text.” [Looking and/or reading away: Dutch press photographs with (nearly) no text]. In Kontexte und Texte. Konstellationen literalen Handelns, ed. by Peter Klotz, Paul R. Portmann-Tselikas and Georg Weidacher, 301–325. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
. 2011. “On Multimodal Communication: Televised Christmas Messages by Heads of State.” In Conjunctions and Disruptions. Communication, Information and Media Studies in Europe, ed. by María J. Pando Canteli, 193–219. Bilbao: University of Deusto Press.Google Scholar
. 2012. “Multimodality and Performance. Britain’s first Holocaust Memorial Day (BBC on January 27, 2001).” In Dialogue in Politics, ed. by Lawrence N. Berlin and Anita Fetzer, 241–307. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. “Memoria in Documentary Film: How Spectators Remember Sequences and Actualize Public Memory.” In Verbal and Visual Rhetoric in a Media World, ed. by Hilde van Belle, Paul Gillaerts, Baldwin van Gorp, Dorien van de Mieroop and Kris Rutten, 389–413. Amsterdam: Leiden University Press.Google Scholar
Sauer, Christoph and Marrit Nijdam-Akkerman. 2013. “Hoe Gaan Woorden en Beelden Samen? Over de Verhouding van Tekstinformatie en Beeldinformatie in Documentaires.” [How do Words and Images Interact? On the Relationships between Text and Image Information in Documentaries]. In Studies in Taalbeheersing 4, ed. by Ronny Boogaart and Henrike Jansen, 303–313. Assen: Van Gorcum.Google Scholar
Scanell, Paddy. 2009. “Review Essay: The Liveness of Broadcast Talk.” Journal of Communication, 59, E1–E6. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scheufele, Bertram T. and Dietram A. Scheufele. 2010. “Of Spreading Activation, Applicability, and Schemas: Conceptual Distinctions and their Operational Implications for Measuring Frames and Framing Effects.” In Doing News Framing Analysis: Empirical and Theoretical Perspectives, ed. by Paul d’Angelo and Jim A. Kuypers, 110–134. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Sinclair, John and Malcolm Coulthard. 1975. Towards an Analysis of Discourse: The English Used by Teachers and Pupils. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Stegu, Martin. 2000: “Text oder Kontext: zur Rolle von Fotos in Tageszeitungen.” [Text or Context: On the Role of Photographs in Newspapers]. In Bild im Text – Text und Bild [Picture in the text – text and picture], ed. by Ulla Fix and Hans Wellmann, 307–324. Heidelberg: C. Winter.Google Scholar
Timberg, Bernard M. 1995. Talk Shows . [URL] (accessed November 7, 2013).
Tolson, Andrew 2006. Media Talk: Spoken Discourse on TV and Radio. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Van Leeuwen, Theo. 2005. Introducing Social Semiotics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Verhoef, Jesper. 2012. Talkshowinterviews met Politici. De Rol van Beeld en Beeldfragmenten voor Gespreksdeelnemers en TV-Kijkers [Political Interviews in Talk Shows: The role of Pictures and Visual Inserts for Participants and TV Audiences]. Master Thesis. Communication and Information Sciences. Groningen: University.Google Scholar
Vraga, Emily K., Stephanie Edgerly, Leticia Bode, Jasun D. Carr, Mitchell Bard, Courtney N. Johnson, Kim Young Mie and Dhavan V. Shah. 2012. “The Correspondent, the Comic, and the Combatant: The Consequences of Host Style in Political Talk Shows.” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 89 (1): 5–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wonneberger, Anke, Klaus Schoenbach and Lex van Meurs. 2013. “How Keeping up Diversifies: Watching Public Affairs TV in the Netherlands 1988 – 2010.” European Journal of Communication 28 (6): 646–662. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Berlin, Lawrence N., Elda Weizman & Anita Fetzer
2015. Introduction. In The Dynamics of Political Discourse [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 259], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Ensink, Titus
2015. Framing the Queen’s head scarf. In Follow-ups in Political Discourse [Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture, 60], ► pp. 139 ff. DOI logo
Mikalayeva, Liudmila
2015. Follow-ups in pre-structured communication. In Follow-ups in Political Discourse [Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture, 60], ► pp. 231 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.