Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T20:54:23.593Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

‘To thine own self be true’: The perceived meanings and functions of political consistency

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 September 2019

Elie Friedman  and
Zohar Kampf
Elie Friedman*
Affiliation:
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel
Zohar Kampf
Affiliation:
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel
*
Address for correspondence: Elie Friedman, The Department of Communications and Journalism, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem Mount Scopius Jerusalem 9190501, Israel[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Being perceived as consistent is a crucial concern for political actors’ in their efforts to mobilize public opinion. This study comprises an analysis of the self-reflexive performance of consistency by Israeli politicians, focusing on the definitions and types of ‘consistency’ in political talk and their consequences. Through an analysis of 194 meta-discursive statements between 2006 and 2017, we illustrate that consistency constitutes a spatiotemporal coordination among cognitions, actions (words and deeds), and the external world, while also being viewed as potentially transforming political reality. Perceived as a sought-after value indicative of truth-telling, determination, and clarity, political actors view consistency as an essential character trait, associated with ideological fortitude, and a basis for practical policy realization. (Consistency, ideology, political discourse, meta-discourse)*

Type
Articles
Information
Language in Society , Volume 49 , Issue 1 , February 2020 , pp. 89 - 113
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Both authors contributed equally to the research and composition of this article. We would like to thank Dr. Shaul Shenhav for his helpful comments on an earlier version of this work. We would like to thank the Lady Davis Fellowship Trust for generously supporting this study.

References

REFERENCES

Antaki, Charles, & Leudar, Ivan (2001). Recruiting the record: Using opponents’ exact words in parliamentary argumentation. Text 21(4):467–88.10.1515/text.2001.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Austin, John L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford: Claredon Press.Google Scholar
Balmas, Meital; Rahat, Gideon; Sheafer, Tamir; & Shenhav, Shaul R. (2014). Two routes to personalized politics: Centralized and decentralized personalization. Party Politics 20(1):37–51.10.1177/1354068811436037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janet B., Bavelas; Black, Alex; Chovil, Nicole; & Mullett, Jennifer (1990). Equivocal communication. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
Billig, Michael (1987). Arguing and thinking: A rhetorical approach to social psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Blumler, Jay G., & Kavanagh, Dennis (1999). The third age of political communication: Influences and features. Political Communication 16(3):209–30.10.1080/105846099198596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bull, Peter; Elliott, July; Palmer, Derrol; & Walker, Libby (1996). Why politicians are three-faced: The face model of political interviews. British Journal of Social Psychology 35(2):267–84.10.1111/j.2044-8309.1996.tb01097.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Channel 7 (2017, January 27). Channel 7. Online: https://www.inn.co.il/News/News.aspx/338782.Google Scholar
Chilton, Paul (1990). Politeness, politics, and diplomacy. Discourse & Society 1(2):201–24.10.1177/0957926590001002005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cialdini, Robert B. (1993). The psychology of influence. New York: William Morrow & Co.Google Scholar
Clayman, Steven E. (1995). Defining moments, presidential debates, and the dynamics of quotability. Journal of Communication 45(3):118–46.10.1111/j.1460-2466.1995.tb00746.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, Shimon (2011, September 19) Channel 7. Online: https://www.inn.co.il/News/News.aspx/226118.Google Scholar
Cohen, Ted (1973). Illocutions and perlocutions. Foundations of Language 9:492–503.Google Scholar
Craig, Robert T. (2008). Metadiscourse. In Donsbach, Wolfgang (ed.), The international encyclopedia of communication, 1–3. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
De Cillia, Rudolf; Reisigl, Martin; & Wodak, Ruth (1999). The discursive construction of national identities. Discourse & Society 10(2):149–73.10.1177/0957926599010002002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duranti, Alessandro (2006). Narrating the political self in a campaign for US congress. Language in Society 35(4):467–97.10.1017/S0047404506060222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eagleton, Terry (1991). Ideology: An introduction. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Edwards III, George C., & Wayne, Stephen J. (2013). Presidential leadership: Politics and policy making. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
Elad, Hagai (2016, October 16). Why I spoke at the Security Council against the occupation. Haaretz. Online: https://www.haaretz.co.il/opinions/1.3096066.Google Scholar
Festinger, Leon, & Carlsmith, James A. (1959). Cognitive consequences of forced compliance. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 58(2):203–10.10.1037/h0041593CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Friedman, Elie, & Kampf, Zohar (2014). Politically speaking at home and abroad: A typology of message gap strategies. Discourse & Society 25(6):1–19.10.1177/0957926514536836CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, Elie; Kampf, Zohar; & Balmas, Meital (2017). Exploring message targeting at home and abroad: The role of political and media considerations in the rhetorical dynamics of conflict resolution. International Journal of Communication 11(2017):1597–1617.Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Greenstein, Arik (2016, October 14). Just don't call them traitors. Mida. Online: https://mida.org.il/2016/10/14/רק-אל-תקראו-להם-בוגדים/.Google Scholar
Gruber, Helmut (1993). Political language and textual vagueness. Pragmatics 3(1):1–28.10.1075/prag.3.1.01gruCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ilie, Cornelia (2003). Discourse and metadiscourse in parliamentary debates. Journal of Language and Politics 2(1):71–92.10.1075/jlp.2.1.05iliCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janis, Irving L. (1972). Victims of groupthink. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Kampf, Zohar (2013). Mediated performatives. In Östman, Jan-Ola & Verschueren, Jef (eds.), Handbook of pragmatics: 2013 installment, 1–24. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Kampf, Zohar, & Katriel, Tamar (2016). Political condemnations: Public speech acts and the moralization of discourse. In Carbaugh, Donal (ed.), The handbook of communication in cross-cultural perspective, 312–26. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Katriel, Tamar (1986). Talking straight: Dugri speech in Israeli sabra culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kedar, Nitzan (2016, June 9). Conflict between Bennett and Netanyahu. Channel 7. Online: https://www.inn.co.il/News/News.aspx/323747.Google Scholar
Koller, Veronika, & Davidson, Paul (2008). Social exclusion as conceptual and grammatical metaphor: A cross-genre study of British policy-making. Discourse & Society 19(3):307–31.10.1177/0957926508088963CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, George (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In Ortony, Andrew (ed.), Metaphor and thought, 202–51. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139173865.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lamberg, Juha-Anti, & Parvinen, Petri (2003). The river metaphor for strategic management. European Management Journal 21(5):549–57.10.1016/S0263-2373(03)00104-XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lempert, Michael (2009). On ‘flip-flopping’: Branded stance-taking in US electoral politics. Journal of Sociolinguistics 13:223–48.10.1111/j.1467-9841.2009.00405.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lempert, Michael (2011). Avoiding the issues as addressivity in US electoral politics. Anthropological Quarterly 84(1):187–208.10.1353/anq.2011.0016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lempert, Michael, & Silverstein, Michael (2012). Creatures of politics: Media, message, and the American presidency. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Levy, Jonah D. (2006). The state after statism: New state activities in the age of liberalization. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Lijphart, Arend (2012). Patterns of democracy: Government forms and performance in thirty-six countries. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Lis, Jonathan (2016, October 21). Coalition chairman threatens to strip citizenship of Israeli activist who criticized occupation at UN. Haaretz. Online: https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/coalition-chairman-seeks-to-strip-citizenship-of-b-tselem-head-1.5452046.Google Scholar
Making Order (2014, December 7). Army Radio. Tel Aviv-Jaffa: The Israeli Defense Forces. Online: digger.ifat.com.Google Scholar
Martin, Lanny W., & Vanberg, Georg (2011). Parliaments and coalitions: The role of legislative institutions in multiparty governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199607884.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martinez Guillem, Susana (2009). Argumentation, metadiscourse and social cognition: Organizing knowledge in political communication. Discourse & Society 20(6):727–46.10.1177/0957926509342368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayer, Roger C.; Davis, James H.; & David Schoorman, F. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review 20(3):709–34.10.5465/amr.1995.9508080335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meade, Melissa R., & Robles, Jessica S. (2017). Historical and existential coherence in political commercials. Discourse & Communication 11(4):404–32.10.1177/1750481317707560CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meet the Press (2016, June 4). Channel 2. Jerusalem: Second Channel Broadcast Authority. Online: digger.ifat.com.Google Scholar
Montpetit, Eric (2012). Does holding beliefs with conviction prevent policy actors from adopting a compromising attitude? Political Studies 60:621–42.10.1111/j.1467-9248.2011.00930.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
MSN website (2010, February 4). Online: digger.ifat.com.Google Scholar
Naurin, Elin (2011). Election promises, party behavior and voter perceptions. Chippenham: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230319301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neuman, Yair, & Tabak, Iris (2003). Inconsistency as an interactional problem: A lesson from political rhetoric. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 32(3):251–67.10.1023/A:1023569501293CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nir, Tomore (2015, February 1). Lieberman: “We will not be partners in a left-wing government”. Srugim. Online: https://www.srugim.co.il/106237-ליברמן-לא-נהיה-שותפים-לממשלת-שמאלGoogle Scholar
Norris, Pippa (2011). Democratic deficit: Critical citizens revisited. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511973383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ochs, Elinor, & Capps, Lisa (2001). Living narrative: Creating lives in everyday storytelling. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Peterson, Michael B.; Slothuus, Rune; & Togeby, Lise (2010). Political parties and value consistency in public opinion formation. Public Opinion Quarterly 73(3):530–50.10.1093/poq/nfq005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petrocik, John R. (1996). Issue ownership in presidential elections, with a 1980 case study. American Journal of Political Science 40(3):825–50.10.2307/2111797CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, Robert D. (1988). Diplomacy and domestic politics: The logic of two-level games. International Organization 42(3):427–60.10.1017/S0020818300027697CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rahat, Gideon, & Hazan, Reuven Y. (2013). Increased personalization in an unstable party system: The 2013 elections in Israel. Representation 49(3):375–89.10.1080/00344893.2013.830477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rahat, Gideon; Hazan, Reuven Y.; & Bloom, Pazit Ben-Nun (2016). Stable blocs and multiple identities: The 2015 elections in Israel. Representation 52(1):99–117.10.1080/00344893.2016.1190592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ravid, Barak (2015, May 21). Hotovely presented Bible interpretations to diplomats: All of the land was given to us by the creator. Haaretz. Online: https://www.haaretz.co.il/news/politics/1.2642152.Google Scholar
Sartori, Giovanni (1976). Parties and party systems: A framework for analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sbisà, Marina (2009). Uptake and conventionality in illocution. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 5(1):33–52.10.2478/v10016-009-0003-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schudson, Michael (1999). Social origins of press cynicism in portraying politics. American Behavioral Scientist 42(6):998–1008.10.1177/00027649921954714CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sclafani, Jennifer (2015). Family as a framing resource for political identity construction: Introduction sequences in presidential primary debates. Language in Society 44(3):369–99.10.1017/S0047404515000238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shamir, Michal, & Arian, Asher (1999). Collective identity and electoral competition in Israel. The American Political Science Review 93(2):265–77.10.2307/2585395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shenhav, Shaul R.; Sheafer, Tamir; & Gabay, Itai (2010). Incoherent narrator: Israeli public diplomacy during the disengagement and the elections in the Palestinian Authority. Israel Studies 15(3):143–63.10.2979/isr.2010.15.3.143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sikoler, Naama, & Milman, Omri (2017, May 2). Kahalon: “Elections now? It is not responsible, but the decision is not in my hands”. Calcalist. Online: https://www.calcalist.co.il/local/articles/0,7340,L-3712323,00.html.Google Scholar
Six with… (2008, August 19) Channel 2. Jerusalem: Second Channel Broadcast Authority. Online: digger.ifat.com.Google Scholar
Stapleton, Karyn, & Wilson, John (2009). Discourse and dissonance: Making sense of socio-political change in Northern Ireland. Journal of Pragmatics 41(7):1358–75.10.1016/j.pragma.2008.09.022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stockton, Julie M. (2006). A ‘good soldier's tale’: The organizational construct of an archetype. Burnaby: Simon Fraser University dissertation.Google Scholar
Strömbäck, Jesper, & Esser, Frank (2014). Mediatization of politics: Towards a theoretical framework. In Strömbäck, Jesper & Esser, Frank (eds.), Mediatization of politics: Understanding the transformation of western democracies, 3–28. London: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9781137275844_1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teven, Jason J. (2008). An examination of perceived credibility of the 2008 presidential candidates: Relationships with believability, likeability, and deceptiveness. Human Communication 11:391–408.Google Scholar
This Morning (2009, January 22). Israel Radio. Jerusalem: Israel Broadcast Authority. Online: digger.ifat.com.Google Scholar
This Morning (2012, May 3). Israel Radio. Jerusalem: Israel Broadcast Authority. Online: digger.ifat.com.Google Scholar
Thompson, John B. (2000). Political scandal: Power and visibility in the media age. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Thursday Evening (2013, June 16). Army Radio. Tel Aviv-Jaffa: The Israeli Defense Forces. Online: digger.ifat.com.Google Scholar
Tolson, Andrew (2011). Conversational presentation and the politics of ‘trust’. In Ekström, Mats & Patrona, Marianna (eds.), Talking politics in broadcast media: Cross-cultural perspectives on political interviewing, 57–74. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/dapsac.42.07tolCrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Eemeren, Frans H., & Grootendorst, Rob (1984). Speech acts in argumentative discussions: A theoretical model for the analysis of discussions directed towards solving conflicts of opinion. Dordrecht: Floris.10.1515/9783110846089CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vardi, Moavi (2016, June 5). Bennett: “You can't be for the Land of Israel in Hebrew and establish a Palestinian State in English”. Reshet 13. Online: http://10tv.nana10.co.il/Article/?ArticleID=1192412.Google Scholar
Weizman, Elda (2008). Positioning in media dialogue: Negotiating roles in the news interview. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/ds.3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weizmann, Leelach (2008, December 10) Lieberman: I believe him. Globes. Online: https://www.globes.co.il/news/article.aspx?did=1000406292.Google Scholar
Wodak, Ruth (2009). The discourse of politics in action: Politics as usual. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Woodly, Deva (2018). The importance of public meaning for political persuasion. Perspectives on Politics 16(1):22–35.10.1017/S1537592717003127CrossRefGoogle Scholar