Difference between revisions of "Hutchby2016"
ElliottHoey (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Ian Hutchby; |Title=Infelicitous talk: Politicians’ words and the media ecology in three British political gaffes |Tag(s)=EMCA; News...") |
(No difference)
|
Latest revision as of 11:58, 11 February 2017
| Hutchby2016 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Hutchby2016 |
| Author(s) | Ian Hutchby |
| Title | Infelicitous talk: Politicians’ words and the media ecology in three British political gaffes |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, News interviews, Media, Political communication, Gaffes |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2016 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Journal of Language and Politics |
| Volume | 15 |
| Number | 6 |
| Pages | 667-687 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1075/jlp.15.6.01hut |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
This article explores how the mediatisation of politics is evolving by analysing the different ways in which three political “gaffes” in recent British politics have been configured by the media environment. The article draws on theories suggesting that contemporary political action is enveloped by media scrutiny and the technological forms of mediation are diversified and hybridised rather than concentrated and uniform. Using case studies, the analysis examines the varying ways in which the broadcast interview can be part of a wider ecology of media technologies that afford an expanding range of discursive strategies for the negative construal of political actions.
Notes
