TEORIA FUNCIONAL

DISCURSUL ELECTORAL
William Benoit, Joseph Blaney, P.M. Pier, 1998
William L. Benoit , 1999
Analiza spoturilor electorale i a dezbaterilor
Scop: legitimarea puterii candidatul s
devin opiunea preferabil n ochii
alegtorilor n funcie de criteriile cetenilor
Alegerile caracter comparativ explicit sau/i
implicit (candidat - contracandidat)
Teoria funcional
Spoturile electorale 3 funcii pentru a crete preferabilitatea n ochii
votanilor

A. ACLAMAIILE - intervenii discursive prin care candidaii se angajeaz n
auto-valorizare. Acest funcie se bazeaz pe urmtorul considerent: cu
ct un candidat d mai bine, ansele ca el s fie preferat i, n final,
votat, cresc.

B. ATACTURILE - un candidat urmrete s reduc dezirabilitatea
oponentului. Un atac de succes l face pe oponent s apar ru sau
indezirabil n ochii alegtorilor, conferindu-i n acelai timp iniiatorului
atacului un avantaj net n preferabilitate. Dar un atac nereuit poate avea
un efect de bumerang.

C. APRRILE respingerea acuzaiilor, cu scopul de a recupera
preferabilitatea pierdut. Poate conine n sine fie o aclamaie, fie un atac
(de exemplu, un atac iniial nereuit poate genera un alt atac, cu efect de
bumerang pentru iniiatorul primului atac).
Categorii de subiecte
n cadrul celor 3 funcii
A. POLITICILE - se adreseaz alegtorilor care decid s-i acorde votul
n funcie de politicile pe care le reprezint sau propun candidaii.
- Cuprind 3 dimensiuni:
Aciuni trecute (realizri anterioare)
Aciuni viitoare (planuri de viitor)
Obiective generale

B. CARACTERUL - const n apeluri ctre alegtorii care decid n funcie
de caracterul persoanelor care urmresc s obin mandatul.
- Cuprind 3 dimensiuni:
Caliti personale
Abiliti de lider
Idealuri /principii/ valori
TEORIA FUNCIONAL EXEMPLE
spoturi publicitare USA
ACLAMAII POLITICI

Alegeri 1988
George Bush ACIUNI TRECUTE: Over the past six years,
eighteen million jobs were created, interest rates were cut in half.
Today, inflation is down, taxes are down, and the economy is
strong.
Michael Dukakis ACIUNI VIITOARE : Mike Dukakis wants to
help. His college opportunities plan says that if a kid like Jimmy has
the grades for college, America should find a way to send him.
George Bush OBIECTIVE GENERALE : I will not allow this country
to be made weak again. I will keep America moving forward, always
forward, for an endless enduring dream and a thousand points of
light. So, some spots acclaim on policy grounds.

ACLAMAII CARACTER
George Bush LIDER: Perhaps no one in this
century is better prepared to be President of
the United States than Bush. In 1992, Bill
Clinton mentioned one of his positive personal
qualities: I care so much about people.
Michael Dukakis IDEALURI he would be a
president who fights for you, the common
people.

ATACURI
Michael Dukakis warned against George Bushs future plans:
George Bush wants to give the wealthiest 1% of the
people in the country a tax break worth $30,000 a year.
Finally, Dukakis also criticized Bushs goals: Mr. Bush does
not object to the wave of merger and of speculation that
has put our companies and our country itself on the
auction block.
a Dukakis ad characterized Mr. Bush in the process: The real
story about furloughs is that George Bush has taken a
furlough from the truth. In other words, Dukakis is
suggesting that one of Bushs personal qualities is that he
is a liar.
Dukakis also characterized his opponents ideals in a political
spot: George Bush is a man who fights for the privileged
few.
APRRI
1984
Reagan (republican) spots accused Mondale
(democrat) of wanting to increase taxes,
declaring that Walter Mondale thinks you
can squeeze more money out of your budget.
A Mondale advertisement used a woman to
respond to this attack: I think youve got it all
wrong. Mondale thinks Im paying too much.
Benoit, W. L. (1999). Seeing Spots: A Functional Analysis of Presidential Television
Advertisements, 1952-1996. Westport, CT: Praeger

Alegeri prezideniale 2012 USA
spoturi electorale
Benoit, W. L., Compton, J.L. (2014). A Functional Analysis of 2012 Primary Primary TV Spots. American
Behavioral Scientist. 497-507.
TEORIA FUNCIONAL- exemple
Dezbatarea Traian Bsescu Crin Antonescu
2009, 14 noiembrie, Cluj
CRIN ANTONESCU
[n viziunea mea, paii practici
sunt, n plan legislativ, revenirea
la ceea ce legislaia romneasc
reuise n 2005 cu Legea
funcionarului public
depolitizarea administraiei 1]
[i, din pcate, cu Ordonana 37,
mpreun PSD cu PD, domnul
Bsescu cu domnul Geoan, au
ntors la o politizare fr
precedent, din pcate, tocmai n
acest an 2009 2]
CRIN ANTONESCU
1. [TEMA : depolitizarea
admin statului, politici,
aciuni viitoare,
aclamaii]

2. [tema: depolitizarea
admin statului, politici,
aciuni trecute, atac MG
& TB]
Traian Bsescu: [ Categoric, da. A i
fost o discuie pe care am fcut-o la
nceputul acestui mandat, prin care
am stabilit cu premierul s declaneze
o iniiativ de corectare a Legii votului
uninominal i eliminarea sistemului de
compensare 1].
[Asta exact pentru c vedem foarte
bine, n Parlament sunt foarte muli
oameni care vin de pe locul doi sau
trei, ceea ce nu nseamn c
majoritatea nu vin de pe locul nti, 2]
[dar sunt oameni de pe locul doi sau
trei mi se pare, chiar domnul Crin
Antonescu vine de pe locul doi. n
colegiu a pierdut alegerile, dar 3]
Crin Antonescu: [ v
mulumesc4][A2 la TB, P, RA,
reforma statului]
Traian Bsescu: *dar asta nu rezolv
fondul problemei. 5]

TRAIAN BSESCU
Traian Bsescu:
1 [tema: votul uninominal, politici,
aciuni trecute, aclamaie]
2 [tema : votul uninominal, politici,
aciuni trecute, aprare]
3 - [tema : votul uninominal,
politici, aciuni trecute, atac - CA]

Crin Antonescu:
4 [tema> votul uninominal, politici,
aciuni trecute, atac TB]

Traian Bsescu
5 [tema: votul uninominal, politici,
aciuni trecute, aprare]


Aclamaii Atacuri Aprri
Traian Bsescu 37 (46.9%) 41 (30.6%)
72 (69.9%)
Crin
Antonescu
42 (53.1%) 93 (69.4%) 31 (30.1%)
Total 79 (25%) 134 (42.4%) 103 (32.6%)
Dezbatarea Traian Bsescu Crin Antonescu 2009, 14 noiembrie, Cluj

POLITICI CARACTER
TRAIAN BSESCU 61 (45.2%) 89 (49.2%)
CRIN ANTONESCU 74 (54.8%) 92 (50.8%)
Total 135 (42.7%) 181 (57.3%)
A functional approach to the 2009 Romanian presidential debates.
Case study: Crin Antonescu versus Traian Bsescu (Camelia Cmeciu,
Monica Ptru). Journal of Media Research, 1(6), 2010, pp. 31-40,
Bibliografie
Benoit, W. L. (1999). Seeing Spots: A Functional
Analysis of Presidential Television Advertisements,
1952-1996. Westport, CT: Praeger
Benoit, W. L., Compton, J.L. (2014). A Functional
Analysis of 2012 Primary Primary TV Spots.
American Behavioral Scientist. 497-507
Cmeciu, C. & Patrut, M. (2010). A functional
approach to the 2009 Romanian presidential
debates. Case study: Crin Antonescu versus Traian
Bsescu. Journal of Media Research, 1(6), 2010,
pp. 31-40.