“Sustainable development” in visual imagery: A functional approach to televised political spots: Acclaiming, attacking, defending

This essay articulates a functional perspective on political advertising. Because elections are fundamentally contrastive, a choice between competing candidates, it is natural for candidates to praise their own strengths (acclaiming) and to disparage their opponents' weaknesses (attacking). When subjected to such attacks, candidates may also choose to refute those accusations (defending). These three functions occur on the twin grounds of policy considerations (issues; past deeds as well as promises of future accomplishments) and on character (images). This theory of political discourse is then applied to presidential general election television spots from 1980–1996. We found that Democrats acclaimed more than they attacked, while Republicans attacked more than they acclaimed. Incumbents acclaimed more than they attacked, while challengers attacked more than they acclaimed. Defense was relatively rare, but it was used in some spots.

Key concepts:

• Presidential Television Spots
• Acclaims
• Attacks
• Defenses
• Policy
• Character