1887
Volume 7, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2210-4119
  • E-ISSN: 2210-4127
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

This article analyzes political interviews, focusing on the corrections made by the interviewees in their answers, from a comparative perspective. The data included both Romanian and Italian language interviews, published in print and online media. Two criteria for the classification of corrections have been identified, one regarding the target of the correction and one regarding the form in which the correction is made. The results show that content-oriented corrections are the most frequent type in both corpora, while mitigated corrections appeared more often in the Italian corpus than in the Romanian one. The politicians interviewed use corrections in order to reject the interviewer’s stance and to demonstrate a better understanding or knowledge of the topic discussed.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ld.7.2.04lev
2017-10-16
2019-10-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bednarek, Monica and Helen Caple
    2012News Discourse. London/New York: Continuum Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Clayman, Steven E. and Tanya Romaniuk
    2011 “Questioning candidates.” InTalking Politics in Broadcast Media. Cross-cultural Perspectives on Political Interviewing, Journalism and Accountability, ed. by Mats Ekström , and Marianna Patrona , 15–32. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Clayman, Steven and John Heritage
    2002The News Interview. Journalists and Public Figures on the Air. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. D’Alessio, Dave and Mike Allen
    2000 “Media Bias in Presidential Elections: A Meta-Analysis.” Journal of Communication50(4): 133–156.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Dascălu-Jinga, Laurenția
    2006Pauzele și întreruperile în conversația românească actuală [Pauses and interruptions in present-day Romanian conversations]. București: Editura Academiei Române.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Dickerson, Paul
    2001 “Disputing with care: analysing interviewees’ treatment of interviewers’ prior turns in televised political interviews.” Discourse Studies3(2): 203–222.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Ekström, Mats
    2009 “Announced refusal to answer: a study of norms and accountability in broadcast political interviews.” Discourse Studies11(6): 681–702.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Fowler, Roger
    1991Language in the News: Discourse and Ideology in the Press. London, New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Gnisci, Augusto , Pierpaolo Zollo , Marco Perugini , and Angiola Di Conza
    2013 “A comparative study of toughness and neutrality in Italian and English political interviews.” Journal of Pragmatics50(1): 152–167.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Hallin, Daniel C. and Paolo Mancini
    2004Comparing Media Systems. Three Models of Media and Politics. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Huls, Erica and Jasper Varwijk
    2011 “Political bias in TV interviews.” Discourse and Society22(1): 48–65.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Jucker, Andreas H.
    1986News Interviews: A Pragmalinguistic Analysis. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Martin, J. R. and P. R. R. White
    2005The Language of Evaluation. Appraisal in English. Basingstoke/New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Montgomery, Martin
    2008 “The discourse of the broadcast news.” Journalism Studies9(2): 260–277.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. 2011 “The accountability interview, politics and change in UK public service broadcasting.” InTalking Politics in Broadcast Media. Cross-cultural perspectives on political interviewing, journalism and accountability, ed. by Mats Ekström and Marianna Patrona , 33–55. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. O’Keeffe, Anne
    2006Investigating Media Discourse. London/New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Pomerantz, Anita
    1984 “Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: some features of preferred/ dispreferred turn shapes.” InStructures of Social Action. Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. by J. Maxwell Atkinson and John Heritage , 57–101. Cambridge/ London: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Reese, Stephen D.
    2011 [2001] ”Understanding the Global Journalist: A Hierarchy-of-Influences Approach.” InCultural meanings of news: A text-reader, ed. by Daniel A. Berkowitz , 3–15. Thousand Oaks, London: Sage Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Richardson, John E.
    2007Analysing Newspapers. An Approach from Critical Discourse Analysis. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Robinson, Sue
    2011 [2007] “‘Someone’s Gotta Be in Control Here’: The Institutionalization of Online News and the Creation of a Shared Journalistic Authority.” InCultural Meanings of News: A text-reader, ed. by Daniel A. Berkowitz , 151–164. Thousand Oaks, London: Sage Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ld.7.2.04lev
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/ld.7.2.04lev
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): confrontation , correction , Italian , media , political communication , political interviews and Romanian
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error