Before doing that, however, one must better understand the context of the debate as a whole. In general, the accepted standards for a presidential debate include formal language, respectful disagreements when necessary, and allotted time slots for both candidates to have an equal opportunity to speak. Although there is a live audience, they are expected to remain quiet throughout. During the debate, Trump and Clinton are to stand on a stage in front of the live audience at their respective podiums facing Wallace, and Wallace is to sit at a table that is exactly halfway between both candidates in order to express the inherent neutrality of his position.
Nonverbal Cues and the Monopolization of Screen Time in the Third Presidential Debate of 201611/2/2016 by Ryan Sheehan “It's how you looked when you said it, not what you actually said.” (Pease 2006). This long held sentiment is one particularly important to keep in mind while watching the third presidential debate of 2016. The debate, featuring presidential hopefuls Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, in addition to moderator Chris Wallace, is about 90 minutes overall and includes the 30-second long segment that is transcribed above. Through an analysis of this brief interaction in particular, it is possible to understand the role of nonverbal elements in the candidates’ discourse and to conclude that Clinton and Trump are involved in a power struggle in which they are both attempting to monopolize screen time through the use of their body language.
Before doing that, however, one must better understand the context of the debate as a whole. In general, the accepted standards for a presidential debate include formal language, respectful disagreements when necessary, and allotted time slots for both candidates to have an equal opportunity to speak. Although there is a live audience, they are expected to remain quiet throughout. During the debate, Trump and Clinton are to stand on a stage in front of the live audience at their respective podiums facing Wallace, and Wallace is to sit at a table that is exactly halfway between both candidates in order to express the inherent neutrality of his position.
2 Comments
by Natalie LaScala The third presidential debate between Hilary Clinton and Donald Trump, moderated by Christopher Wallace, demonstrates a great struggle and competition for power. Power, in this case, refers to the ability to make one’s voice heard and have control over the direction of the conversation. The debates are meant to serve as a platform for discussion and giving the candidates an opportunity to persuade voters to agree with their position on issues (Friedman, 2012). A speech community is created in the setting of a presidential debate, in which there are certain expectations. One of these expectations, is that moderator will moderate the debate and have jurisdiction over who speaks and what they will speak about. The candidates are expected to listen to the moderator and their ideas and policies. However, throughout this debate, and particularly in this instance, the momentary power over the conversation frequently shifts between Wallace, Trump, and Clinton. Clinton is being accused of having a faulty policy on border security and uses both verbal and non-verbal communication as a means of restoring power in her favor. While she is making attempts to redirect the conversation, Trump and Wallace are also trying to keep hold of their power.
|
Main AuthorJamie A. Thomas is a linguistic anthropologist and digital media producer. Her forthcoming book Zombies Speak Swahili is all about the undead, videogames, and viral Black language. She teaches at Santa Monica College and CSU Dominguez Hills. Archives
January 2022
Categories
All
|