Difference between revisions of "Ekstrom2009"
(Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Mats Ekstrom; |Title=Announced refusal to answer: A study of norms and accountability in broadcast political interviews |Tag(s)=EMCA; C...") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{BibEntry | {{BibEntry | ||
|BibType=ARTICLE | |BibType=ARTICLE | ||
| − | |Author(s)=Mats | + | |Author(s)=Mats Ekström; |
|Title=Announced refusal to answer: A study of norms and accountability in broadcast political interviews | |Title=Announced refusal to answer: A study of norms and accountability in broadcast political interviews | ||
| − | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Conversation Analysis; Broadcast; Interviews; Politics; Accounts; | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Conversation Analysis; Broadcast; Interviews; Politics; Accounts; |
|Key=Ekstrom2009 | |Key=Ekstrom2009 | ||
|Year=2009 | |Year=2009 | ||
|Journal=Discourse Studies | |Journal=Discourse Studies | ||
|Volume=11 | |Volume=11 | ||
| − | |Pages= | + | |Number=6 |
| − | |URL= | + | |Pages=681–702 |
| − | |DOI= | + | |URL=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1461445609347232 |
| + | |DOI=10.1177/1461445609347232 | ||
|Abstract=This article investigates the announced refusal to answer as a form of dispreferred and challenging response in broadcast political interviews. The aim is to study how the rightness and wrongness of conduct is dealt with in situations of announced refusal. More specifically, the paper focuses on: (1) announced refusal as a particular type of conduct; (2) the orientation to norms and accountability in situations of announced refusal; (3) how the legitimacy of politics and journalism is negotiated in broadcast interviews. The data consist of 23 cases from Swedish election campaigns, and the analysis is based on Conversation Analysis, focusing on how the participants treat themselves and others as normatively accountable. The study indicates that the politicians understand themselves as accountable and avoid hostile actions in the interviews. Their refusals are designed mainly to be understood as appropriate distancing actions without explicitly complaining about the interviewers’ conduct. | |Abstract=This article investigates the announced refusal to answer as a form of dispreferred and challenging response in broadcast political interviews. The aim is to study how the rightness and wrongness of conduct is dealt with in situations of announced refusal. More specifically, the paper focuses on: (1) announced refusal as a particular type of conduct; (2) the orientation to norms and accountability in situations of announced refusal; (3) how the legitimacy of politics and journalism is negotiated in broadcast interviews. The data consist of 23 cases from Swedish election campaigns, and the analysis is based on Conversation Analysis, focusing on how the participants treat themselves and others as normatively accountable. The study indicates that the politicians understand themselves as accountable and avoid hostile actions in the interviews. Their refusals are designed mainly to be understood as appropriate distancing actions without explicitly complaining about the interviewers’ conduct. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 11:26, 23 November 2019
| Ekstrom2009 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Ekstrom2009 |
| Author(s) | Mats Ekström |
| Title | Announced refusal to answer: A study of norms and accountability in broadcast political interviews |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Conversation Analysis, Broadcast, Interviews, Politics, Accounts |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2009 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Discourse Studies |
| Volume | 11 |
| Number | 6 |
| Pages | 681–702 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1177/1461445609347232 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
This article investigates the announced refusal to answer as a form of dispreferred and challenging response in broadcast political interviews. The aim is to study how the rightness and wrongness of conduct is dealt with in situations of announced refusal. More specifically, the paper focuses on: (1) announced refusal as a particular type of conduct; (2) the orientation to norms and accountability in situations of announced refusal; (3) how the legitimacy of politics and journalism is negotiated in broadcast interviews. The data consist of 23 cases from Swedish election campaigns, and the analysis is based on Conversation Analysis, focusing on how the participants treat themselves and others as normatively accountable. The study indicates that the politicians understand themselves as accountable and avoid hostile actions in the interviews. Their refusals are designed mainly to be understood as appropriate distancing actions without explicitly complaining about the interviewers’ conduct.
Notes
