The Benevolent Technocrat: Michael Dukakis' Strategy in the 1988 Presidential Debates.

Autor/in	Herbeck, Dale A.
Titel	The Benevolent Technocrat: Michael Dukakis' Strategy in the 1988 Presidential Debates.
Quelle	(1989), (15 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Communication Research; Debate; Debate Format; Mass Media Role; Persuasive Discourse; Political Candidates; Political Issues; Presidential Campaigns (United States) + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Kommunikationsforschung; Debating; Streitgespräch; Persuasion; Persuasive Kommunikation; Politischer Faktor
Abstract	Michael Dukakis lost the presidential campaign debates of 1988 (or at least failed to capitalize as much as he might have) because he understood the debates to be genuine debates. Consequently, Dukakis acted as a debater generating an image of himself as a "benevolent technocrat," which was an error. It must be pointed out that the presidential debates and real academic debates are quite different for several reasons. For example, the real controversy in presidential debates is between the candidates and their media questioners, as opposed to being between the two candidates. It was also obvious that Dukakis and his handlers did not appreciate the specialized nature of these debates. An analysis of the questions and answers that Dukakis gave showed that the image he was trying to project, that of a benevolent technocrat, was disastrous. He showed no emotion and feeling, he did not muster outrage at the hypothetical rape and murder of his wife, and he was unable to portray himself as a leader. The failure of Dukakis' strategy is significant for several reasons. It suggests that the 1988 presidential debates were more an exercise in image management than debating, and it illustrates why "traditional" debate between the presidential candidates is extremely unlikely. What this means is that the debates should probably be appreciated for what they are, political events exemplifying democratic traditions open to everyone, rather than examples of the traditional conception of a debate. (Seventeen notes are included.) (MS)
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC