Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Rezumat
Conductor tiinific:
Prof. univ. dr. Daniela ROVENA-FRUMUANI
Doctorand:
Gabriela-Arabela BAICAN (BRICIU)
2016
CUPRINS:
INTRODUCERE........................................................................................................................7
I. CADRUL TEORETIC ..........................................................................................................15
I.1. COMUNICAREA POLITIC: cmp teoretic interdisciplinar .......................................15
I.1.1 Definiii i aspecte conceptuale ................................................................................16
I.1.1.1. Definirea comunicrii politice ..........................................................................16
I.1.1.2. Cmpul politic i homo politicus ......................................................................19
I.1.1.3. Puterea i legitimarea puterii ............................................................................20
I.1.1.4. Opinie public i reprezentare ..........................................................................22
I.1.2. Perspective teoretice ................................................................................................27
I.1.3. Transformri i mutaii n comunicarea politic actual .........................................33
I.1.3.1. Comercializarea politicului: marketing politic, relaii publice politice i
publicitate politic.........................................................................................................34
I.1.3.2. Americanizare, profesionalizare, modernizare .................................................42
I.1.3.3. Personalizarea i spectacularizarea politicului .................................................46
I.1.4. Concluzie .................................................................................................................48
I.2. ASPECTE DISCURSIVE ALE COMUNICRII POLITICE ..........................................49
I.2.1. Discursul i studiile discursive ................................................................................49
I.2.1.1. Aspecte generale ...............................................................................................49
I.2.1.2. Teorii ale discursului ........................................................................................55
I.2.2. Discursul politic i analiza acestuia .........................................................................67
I.2.2.1. Limbaj i politic ..............................................................................................67
I.2.2.2. Analiza discursului politic ................................................................................70
I.2.2.3. Legitimarea puterii prin discurs........................................................................75
I.2.3. Dimensiuni i structuri ale discursului politic .........................................................77
I.2.4. Concluzie .................................................................................................................82
I.3. DEZBATEREA PREZIDENIAL TELEVIZAT ..........................................................83
I.3.1. Mass-media i politica .............................................................................................83
I.3.2. Elemente i caracteristici ale dezbaterii prezideniale televizate.............................91
I.3.3. Tradiia american ...................................................................................................98
I.3.4. Dezbaterile televizate n tradiia european...........................................................105
I.3.5. Studii i cercetri privind dezbaterile prezideniale televizate ..............................122
I.3.6. Stadiul actual al cercetrii dezbaterilor prezideniale n Romnia ........................128
I.3.7. Concluzie ...............................................................................................................131
II. CADRUL ANALITIC I METODOLOGIC ....................................................................132
II.1. INTRODUCERE ...........................................................................................................132
II.2. SCOPUL I OBIECTIVELE CERCETRII ................................................................133
II.2.1. Premisele cercetrii ..............................................................................................133
II.2.2. Obiectivele cercetrii............................................................................................135
II.3. NTREBRILE CERCETRII .....................................................................................135
II.4. NCADRAREA TEORETIC ......................................................................................136
II.4.1. Modelul funcional de analiz a dezbaterilor televizate .......................................136
II.4.1.1 Asumpii .........................................................................................................137
II.4.1.2 Ipotezele modelului/ Prediciile teoriei ..........................................................138
II.4.1.3 Aplicabilitatea modelului i rezultatele obinute............................................138
II.4.2. Teoria argumentrii ..............................................................................................140
II.4.2.1 Perspectiva pragma-dialectic de analiz a discursului .................................140
II.4.2.2 Sofismele argumentrii ..................................................................................148
II.5. OPERAIONALIZAREA CONCEPTELOR ................................................................153
II.6. IPOTEZELE CERCETRII .........................................................................................161
II.7. METODOLOGIA CERCETRII .................................................................................162
II.7.1 Stabilirea tipului de cercetare ................................................................................162
II.7.2 Corpusul cercetrii ................................................................................................163
II.7.3 Alegerea metodei de cercetare ..............................................................................164
II.7.3.1. Analiza de coninut .......................................................................................164
II.7.3.2. Analiza argumentativ. Perspectiva pragma-dialectic ................................166
II.7.3.3. Metoda observaiei ........................................................................................168
II.7.4 Elaborarea instrumentelor de cercetare .................................................................168
II.7.5. Validitatea i fidelitatea cercetrii ........................................................................176
II.7.5.1. Validitatea i fidelitatea cercetrii cantitative ...............................................177
II.7.5.2. Validitatea i fidelitatea cercetrii calitative .................................................179
III. ANALIZA I INTERPRETAREA DATELOR ..............................................................180
III.1. PRIMA DEZBATERE PREZIDENIAL DIN ROMNIA - 17 MAI 1990 ...............180
III.1.1. Context extern .....................................................................................................180
III.1.2. Context intern......................................................................................................188
III.1.3. Analiza mesajelor politice n cadrul dezbaterii ...................................................192
III.1.3.1. Analiza funcional a dezbaterii ..................................................................192
III.1.3.2. Analiza argumentativ a dezbaterii..............................................................196
III.1.4. Concluzii .............................................................................................................209
III.2. DEZBATERILE PREZIDENIALE DIN 7 I 8 OCTOMBRIE 1992 ........................210
III.2.1. Context extern .....................................................................................................210
III.2.2. Contextul intern al dezbaterii din 7 octombrie 1992 ..........................................214
III.2.3. Contextul intern al dezbaterii din 8 octombrie 1992 ..........................................216
III.2.4. Analiza mesajelor politice n cadrul dezbaterilor ...............................................218
III.2.4.1. Analiza funcional a dezbaterilor ...............................................................218
III.2.4.2. Analiza argumentativ a dezbaterilor ..........................................................224
III.2.5. Concluzii .............................................................................................................234
III.3. DEZBATERILE PREZIDENIALE DIN 11 I 14 NOIEMBRIE 1996 ......................236
III.3.1. Context extern .....................................................................................................236
III.3.2. Contextul intern al dezbaterii din 11 noiembrie 1996 ........................................242
III.3.3. Contextul intern al dezbaterii din 14 noiembrie 1996 ........................................244
III.3.4. Analiza mesajelor politice n cadrul dezbaterilor ...............................................245
III.3.4.1. Analiza funcional a dezbaterilor ...............................................................245
III.3.4.2. Analiza argumentativ a dezbaterilor ..........................................................251
III.3.5. Concluzii .............................................................................................................261
III.4. DEZBATEREA PREZIDENIAL DIN 8 DECEMBRIE 2004 .................................264
III.4.1. Context extern .....................................................................................................264
III.4.2. Context intern......................................................................................................270
III.4.3. Analiza mesajelor politice n cadrul dezbaterii ...................................................272
III.4.3.1. Analiza funcional a dezbaterii ..................................................................272
III.4.3.2. Analiza argumentativ a dezbaterii..............................................................276
III.4.4. Concluzii .............................................................................................................286
III.5. DEZBATEREA PREZIDENIAL DIN 3 DECEMBRIE 2009 .................................288
III.5.1. Context extern .....................................................................................................288
III.5.2. Context intern......................................................................................................293
III.5.3. Analiza mesajelor politice n cadrul dezbaterii ...................................................296
III.5.3.1. Analiza funcional a dezbaterii ..................................................................296
III.5.3.2. Analiza argumentativ a dezbaterii..............................................................300
III.5.4. Concluzii .............................................................................................................309
III.6. DEZBATERILE PREZIDENIALE DIN 11 I 12 NOIEMBRIE 2014 ......................311
III.6.1. Context extern .....................................................................................................311
III.6.2. Context intern dezbatere 11 noiembrie 2014 ......................................................315
III.6.3. Context intern dezbatere 12 noiembrie 2014 ......................................................318
III.6.4. Analiza mesajelor politice n cadrul dezbaterilor ...............................................319
III.6.4.1. Analiza funcional a dezbaterilor ...............................................................319
III.6.4.2. Analiza argumentativ a dezbaterilor ..........................................................324
III.6.5. Concluzii .............................................................................................................334
III.7. TESTAREA IPOTEZELOR ........................................................................................335
CONCLUZII GENERALE ....................................................................................................352
Bibliografie .............................................................................................................................368
Lista tabele ..........................................................................................................................394
Lista casetelor text ..............................................................................................................399
List figurilor ......................................................................................................................400
ANEXE
7
Pornind de la aceast perspectiv, studiul exploreaz dinamica relaiei dintre politic i
limbaj la nivelul dezbaterilor prezideniale, cu ndreptarea ateniei asupra funciilor mesajelor
politice, cu scopul de a evidenia modaliti n care candidaii i construiesc imaginea prin
intermediul discursului i cum se difereniaz astfel de contracandidai.
Lucrarea definete discursul deopotriv ca text i context, acesta fiind un proces sau o
practic de contextualizare a limbajelor folosite, a producerii actelor de vorbire i a practicii
alternanei de replici. Consider c este important s analizm aspectul contextual pentru a
nelege cum se produc anumite funcii i de ce se dezvolt discursul pe direcia anumitor topici
([en] topics). Modelul funcional despre care se estimeaz c ar avea o aplicabilitate
internaional (vezi Benoit, 2014) nu are n vedere aspectele contextuale, fapt ce i-a fost reproat
n studiile care au artat c sunt situaii n care se obin alte rezultate dect cele preconizate
(Cmeciu i Ptru, 2010a, 2010b. Isotalus, 2011. Isotalus i Aarnio, 2006). Astfel, am urmrit
realizarea studiului pornind de la cele dou dimensiuni: text (la nivel general prin aplicarea
modelului funcional i la nivel particular prin analiza argumentativ) i context (la nivel macro
i micro).
O1. Descrierea contextului n care s-au realizat dezbaterile prezideniale televizate din
al doilea tur de scrutin n Romnia postdecembrist.
8
O4. Compararea rezultatelor obinute n urma analizei funcionale a discursului din
dezbaterile prezideniale televizate din Romnia cu cele americane (furnizate de modelul
teoretic, vezi subcap. II.4.1).
Structura lucrrii
Lucrarea este structurat n trei pri: o parte teoretic care are ca obiectiv definirea i
conturarea celor mai importante concepte teoretice care stau la baza studiului, o parte
metodologic care urmrete s construiasc i s explice ntregul demers metodologic, de la
teoriile utilizate, la metodele i instrumentele aplicate, ct i la validitatea i fidelitatea cercetrii
i o parte analitic n care sunt prezentate rezultatele cercetrii pentru fiecare dezbatere n parte,
n acord cu obiectivele i ntrebrile cercetrii.
9
fundamentale menionate anterior n partea I a tezei: Cadrul teoretic sunt dezvoltate n cadrul
a trei capitole, dup cum urmeaz:
Capitolul I.2: Aspecte discursive ale comunicrii politice reliefeaz rolul i importana
discursului i a studiilor discursive, prin raportare la aspectele sale generale i teoriile asociate,
dar i specificitatea acestuia ca discurs politic. Din acest punct de vedere tratez limbajul i
politica, diversele modaliti de analiz a discursului politic, iar n finalul acestui capitol supun
ateniei principalele forme de legitimare a puterii prin discurs, evideniind totodat dimensiunile
i structurile asociate acestuia.
Capitolul II.3: ntrebrile cercetrii expune cele cinci interogaii principale determinate de
obiectivele cercetrii: (Q1) Care sunt caracteristicile contextuale ale dezbaterilor prezideniale
din Romnia postcomunist?;(Q2) Cum sunt distribuite cele trei funcii ale mesajelor politice
n cadrul dezbaterilor prezideniale din Romnia postcomunist?; (Q3) Sunt mesajele politice
din cadrul dezbaterii prezideniale axate mai degrab pe imaginea candidailor dect pe
probleme legate de politic?; (Q4) Ce strategii discursive specifice utilizeaz candidaii n
discursul politic din cadrul dezbaterilor?; (Q5) n ce msur rezultatele aplicrii modelului
funcional asupra dezbaterilor prezideniale romneti se ncadreaz n parametrii i tendinele
acestui model teoretic? i nc cinci ntrebri secundare subsumate lui Q2, Q3 i Q5: (Q2_1)
Exist diferene la nivelul frecvenei utilizrii funciilor mesajelor politice din cadrul
dezbaterilor prezideniale televizate, raportat la poziia politic a participanilor la dezbatere
(candidat la putere, candidat din partea opoziiei)?;(Q2_2) Exist diferene la nivelul frecvenei
utilizrii celor trei funcii ale mesajelor politice din cadrul dezbaterilor prezideniale televizate,
raportat la rezultatul electoral obinut de participanii la dezbatere (candidat ctigtor/ candidat
nvins)?; (Q3_1) Exist diferene la nivelul frecvenei utilizrii enunurilor cu privire la politic
i a enunurilor cu privire la imaginea candidatului, n funcie de poziia politic a participanilor
la dezbatere (candidat la putere, candidat din partea opoziiei)?; (Q3_2) Exist diferene la
nivelul frecvenei utilizrii enunurilor cu privire la politic i a enunurilor cu privire la
imaginea candidatului, n funcie de rezultatul obinut de participanii la dezbatere (candidat
ctigtor/ candidat nvins)? i (Q5_1) Exist diferene semnificative ntre rezultatele aplicrii
modelului funcional asupra dezbaterilor prezideniale romneti i rezultatele aplicrii acestuia
asupra dezbaterilor din S.U.A. (conform rezultatelor studiilor lui Benoit (2007, 2014))?
11
pragma-dialectic de analiz a manevrrii strategice a discursului (van Eemeren, 2010.
Zarefsky, 2009) i identificarea sofismelor argumentrii (van Eemeren i Grootendorst, 2004.
Iecu, 2006). Cercetarea i propune s se orienteaze mai degrab pe situaiile i aciunile
discursive din cadrul dezbaterilor i pe consecinele acestora, dect pe condiiile discursive din
trecut (e.g., discursul prezideniabililor naintea campaniei electorale), nelesul fiind generat
n cadrul interaciunii dintre prezideniabili.
Capitolul II.6: Ipotezele cercetrii explic pe de-o parte rolul cercetrii inductive
(aceasta cutnd identificarea unor modele i particulariti la nivelul corpusului analizat,
nefiind necesar formularea de ipoteze) i a cercetrii deductive pentru care sunt exprimate
trei ipoteze principale i zece de cercetare furnizate de modelul teoretic i ntrebrile cercetrii.
12
deductive stabilite prin prisma modelului funcional de analiz a mesajelor politice din cadrul
dezbaterilor prezideniale.
Unul dintre principalele argumente pentru susinerea factorului de noutate ine chiar de
corpusul analizat, pn n acest moment nicio cercetare nu a cuprins o analiz longitudinal a
tuturor dezbaterilor pe care le utilizez n analiza mea. Principalul motiv n acest sens l
constituie disponibilitatea datelor, neexistnd ca n cazul dezbaterilor franceze i americane o
baz de date cu acces liber. Spre exemplu, una dintre cele mai cunoscute dezbateri
postdecembriste, cea din 2004 dintre Bsescu i Nstase nu se mai gsete n arhiva televiziuni
publice, precum nici dezbaterile din 1996, utiliznd n aceste cazuri nregistrri din arhive
personale sau n cazul dezbaterii din 14 noiembrie 1996, completnd transcrierea
nregistrrilor pariale ale departamentului de tiri al TVR cu transcrierea realizat de Haine
(2000).
Elementele principale de noutate i originalitate ale acestui studiu sunt susinute prin:
design-ul cercetrii (abordarea analizei dezbaterii din patru direcii pe cele dou dimensiuni
discursive: text i context - studiul contextului din perspectiv cognitiv i semiotic si studiul
textului prin analiza funcional a mesajelor politice i prin studiul argumentativ dintr-o
perspectiv pragma-dialectic); studiul longitudinal al unui corpus complex (derulat pe
perioada a 25 de ani) i analiza comparativ de tip cantitativ ntre rezultatele obinute pe
dezbaterile romneti i pe cele americane).
n cadrul acestei cercetri voi utiliza civa termeni care au o semnificaie diferit dect
cea conferit de nelesul comun al lor. n modelul funcional (e.g., Benoit 2007, 2014) apar
conceptele de acclaims, topics i character pe care eu le-am tradus aclamaii, topici,
respectiv character.
13
Noiunea de topici ([en] topics, [fr] topique) este neleas din perspectiva pe care o
atribuie Boltanski (2004, p. xv)- astfel, topicile vor fi nelese ca modaliti predefinite de
reprezentare n discurs.
Msuri
Aclamaii (AC) Atac (AT)
defensive (MD)
1990 202 (82%) 27 (11%) 17 (7%)
1992 162 (30%) 203 (37%) 182 (33%)
1996 218 (38%) 220 (39%) 132 (23%)
2004 148 (46%) 92 (28%) 84 (26%)
2009 171 (36%) 172 (37%) 127 (27%)
2014 137 (26%) 285 (53%) 113 (21%)
Total 1038 (39%) 999 (37%) 655 (24%)
Distribuia funciilor mesajelor politice n dezbaterile de tur final al campaniilor prezideniale distribuie
neomogen: temele identificate n discursurile prezideniabililor nu sunt distribuite n mod egal pe categoriile celor
trei funcii ale mesajelor (2 = 127,34; p< 0,01, df= 1)
14
Poate fi surprinztoare aceast concluzie atunci cnd jumtate dintre dezbaterile analizate
nu respect aceast regul, atacurile dominnd aceste confruntri. Astfel de cazuri ntlnim n
cadrul confruntrilor din 1996 i 2009, unde diferena dintre frecvena aclamaiilor i cea a
atacurilor este foarte mic (cu doar 1% mai multe atacuri), iar n cadrul dezbaterilor din 1992
aceasta se mrete la 7% (n prima dezbatere din 1992 nregistrndu-se cu 22% mai multe
atacuri - vezi III.2.3). Cea mai ridicat pondere a atacurilor se nregistreaz, ns, n cadrul
confruntrilor din ultima campanie prezidenial, cnd exist o diferen de 19% ntre atacuri
i aclamaii: n prima dezbatere din 11 noiembrie 2014 cei doi candidai atacndu-se ntr-o
proporie de 46% (AC: 27%), iar n confruntarea final ponderea atacurilor crete la 61% (AC:
24%).
O pondere mai mare a aclamaiilor s-a nregistrat n dezbaterile din 1990 i 2004; prima
dezbatere prezidenial televizat din Romnia fiind cea n care se nregistreaz cu
preponderen mesaje politice pozitive (AC: 82% i AT: 11%). Putem ajunge la concluzia c
rezultatul final al distribuiei funciilor mesajelor politice n cadrul dezbaterilor reprezint o
circumstan a deosebirilor aprute la nivelul cazurilor independente, deoarece prin eliminarea
din analiz a dezbaterii din 1990, am obine un rezultat care ar respinge aceast prim ipotez.
Din perspectiva mesajelor politice utilizate n cadrul dezbaterilor prezideniale ntre cele
dou tururi de scutin, nu observm diferene majore n utilizarea atacurilor i a aclamaiilor de
ctre cei doi prezideniabili, n funcie de influena politic pe care acetia o deineau la
momentul alegerilor. n majoritatea dezbaterilor analizate, candidaii aflai la putere au folosit
mai mult aclamaiile, atacnd mai puin; singurele excepii fiind n 1992 i 2014, cnd ponderea
atacurilor depete ponderea aclamaiilor, att n cazul candidailor aflai la putere, ct i a
celor aflai n opoziie. n cazul candidailor aflai n opoziie mai apar nregistrate dou cazuri
n care frecvena atacurilor este mai mare dect cea a aclamaiilor, i anume: n 1996 (Emil
Constantinescu) i 2009 (Mircea Geoan).
15
Distribuia general a funciilor mesajelor politice n dezbaterile prezideniale studiate, ne
arat o orientare preponderent spre aspecte politice: 55% din temele nregistrate vizeaz aspecte
politice, iar 45% vizeaz aspecte ce in de imaginea candidatului (topicile politice sunt mai
frecvente dect topicile cu privire la character).
Politic Character
1990 128 (52%) 118 (48%)
1992 379 (69%) 168 (31%) Distribuia general a topicilor mesajelor politice n
1996 273 (48%) 297 (52%) dezbaterile din cadrul campaniilor prezideniale
2004 178 (55%) 146 (45%) distribuie neomogen - temele identificate n
2009 265 (56%) 205 (44%) discursurile prezideniabililor nu sunt distribuite n
2014 247 (46%) 288 (54%) mod egal pe categoriile celor dou topici ale mesajelor
Total 1470 1222 politice (2 = 22,66; p< 0,01, df= 1),
(55%) (45%)
n majoritatea dezbaterilor analizate, candidaii aflai la putere s-au axat n discurs mai
mult pe aspecte politice dect de imagine; singura excepie fiind n 2014, cnd discursul ambilor
candidai se orienteaz pe imagine, att n prima dezbatere, ct i n cea final. n cazul
candidailor aflai n opoziie, pe lng cazul lui Klaus Iohannis n 2014, mai este nregistrat un
singur caz n care discursul este orientat mai frecvent pe aspectele ce in de imagine, fiind vorba
de confruntrile din 1996.
Distribuia celor dou dimensiuni ale topicii mesajelor politice n discursul candidailor
aflai la putere a fost constant, singurele dezbateri care se abat de la distribuia central fiind
cele din 1992, cnd Ion Iliescu i concentreaz discursul pe aspecte politice trecute i viitoare.
n aceleai dezbateri, candidatul opoziiei Emil Constantinescu are dintre prezideniabilii
aflai n opoziie n cele ase campanii- discursul cu cea mai ridicat pondere de topici cu privire
la politic. De asemenea, n dezbaterile dintre cele dou tururi de scrutin din 2004 i 2009 se
poate observa utilizarea mai frecvent a aspectelor politice n discursul candidailor aflai n
acel moment n opoziie: Traian Bsescu (56% - 2004) i Mircea Geoan (58% - 2009).
16
CONCLUZII GENERALE
Dezbaterile televizate dintre cele dou tururi de scrutin ne ilustreaz un tablou al politicii
romneti, care ncadreaz cele mai importante teme ale campaniilor prezideniale. Perspectiva
longitudinal asupra acestui fenomen relev cteva pagini din istoria comunicrii politice
postdecembriste i a tranziiei dinspre un sistem totalitar spre unul democratic. n acest sens,
datele culese i analizate din cadrul corpusului propus sunt reprezentative pentru studierea
dezbaterilor prezideniale televizate din Romnia ntre cele dou tururi de scrutin, ele acoperind
ase dintre cele apte campanii prezideniale postdecembriste; n 2000 nefiind organizate
asemenea evenimente electorale dup primul tur (vezi Beciu, 2015). Dezbaterile cuprind
discursurile a nou prezideniabili romni din perioada 1990 2014, trei dintre acetia
participnd la mai multe confruntri: Ion Iliescu (cinci participri trei campanii prezideniale),
Emil Constantinescu (patru participri - dou campanii prezideniale) i Traian Bsescu (dou
participri).
n tabelul de mai jos sunt schematizate planul i metodele utilizate n cadrul acestei
cercetri n acord cu obiectivele propuse i conform cadrului analitic i metodologic stabilit n
partea a doua a lucrrii (pp. 132 - 180).
17
Analiza descriptiv i longitudinal a
Scopul cercetrii dezbaterilor prezideniale, ntre cele dou tururi,
din Romnia postcomunist.
ntrebrile Tipul Metode i tehnici de
Obiectivele cercetrii cercetrii
Ipoteze
analiz
O1. Descrierea contextului n care s-au realizat Analiza contextului
dezbaterile prezideniale televizate din al (observaie direct i
Q1 Inductiv -
doilea tur de scrutin n Romnia observaia
postdecembrist. documentar)
O2. Identificarea i clasificarea funciilor Analiza de coninut
comunicrii politice utilizate de candidaii
Q2, Q3 Deductiv I1-I2 a mesajelor de tip
prezideniali n procesul de poziionare fa de funcional
adversari, n cadrul dezbaterii, (analiza frecvenelor)
O3. Identificarea i descrierea strategiilor
argumentative utilizate de candidai n Analiza
Q4 Inductiv - argumentativ
elaborarea mesajelor politice transmise n (analiz secvenial)
cadrul dezbaterii.
O4. Compararea rezultatelor obinute n urma Analiz
analizei funcionale a discursului din comparativ
dezbaterile prezideniale televizate din Q5 Deductiv I3 cantitativ
Romnia cu cele americane (furnizate de (testarea statistic a
modelul teoretic, vezi subcap. II.4.1). corespondenei)
Nou (9/ 11) dezbateri prezideniale televizate
Corpus
ntre cele dou tururi de scrutin
Schema analitic a cercetrii
Cercetarea inductiv a evideniat un context extern i intern instabil, n care actorii politici
urmresc s exploateze situaiile favorabile lor i defavorabile contracandidailor, prin repetiia
subiectelor i utilizarea unor figuri de stil de accentuare, nclcnd frecvent regulile discuiei
critice (Van Eemeren i Grootendorst, 2004), mai ales prin utilizarea sofismelor de tip ad
hominem (atacuri la persoan) i ad populum (apelul la popor la emoiile i credinele
audienei), iar prin utilizarea manevrelor strategice de schimbare a subiectului i de modificare
a sferei de aciune a audienei relevante urmresc minimizarea situaiilor defavorabile.
18
Contextul intern este conectat la contextul extern, fiind determinat de schimbrile i
evoluia mass-media televizate (apariia televiziunilor comerciale i a celor de tiri) i a cadrului
legislativ de difuzare a mesajelor politice n campaniile electorale, fiecare televiziune utiliznd
i ajustnd propriul format de dezbatere i ncercnd s-i impun identitatea mediatic.
19
i de a accentua lupta strns dintre candidai (CDR-ul ctigase alegerile parlamentare, iar
diferenele de sondaje dintre Emil Constantinescu i Ion Iliescu erau mici).
Din punct de vedere al organizrii (dispunere spaial i locaie), cel mai atipic format,
care de altfel se apropie foarte mult de cel american de tip town hall meeting, cu o dispunere
concentric ntr-un spaiu public (Palatul Parlamentului), este cel al dezbaterii din 3 decembrie
2009. Acest structurare ncurajeaz spectacularizarea evenimentului prin prezena galeriilor n
spatele fiecrui candidat, care i ofer ntr-un mod zgomotos suportul politic. De asemenea,
candidaii sunt ntr-o permanent negociere cu moderatorul pentru a obine dreptul la replic,
de multe ori sfidnd regulile dezbaterii i intervenind peste contracandidat.
Spre deosebire de 2009, confruntrile prezideniale din 2014 (mai ales prima) au fost
organizate deficitar, fr specificarea unor reguli clare, fr vreo tematic bine stabilit i fr
a anuna publicul cu suficient timp nainte. Astfel, comparnd aceste aspecte cu tradiia
american este clar lipsa instituionalizrii acestei practici n Romnia.
Urmrind dezbaterile romneti, interaciunea comunicativ este mai redus mai ales n
acele cazuri n care regulile impuse de format sunt mai restrictive (e.g., 2004, 2009 i n a doua
confruntare din 2014), dei candidaii au un stil interlocutiv i n cadrul acestora, mai ales prin
utilizarea dreptului la replic i prin nclcarea sau sfidarea regulilor dezbaterii. A putea spune
c dintre aceste trei confruntri doar cea din 2004 se construiete mai mult pe baza unor
intervenii separate a celor doi prezideniabili, gradul de interaciune fiind mai limitat. De
asemenea, se poate observa c n dezbaterile mai relaxate din punct de vedere al regulilor conin
mai multe atacuri, mai ales la persoan (ad hominem abuziv, ad hominem circumstanial i ad
hominem tu quoque), iar discursul candidailor s-a orientat mai mult spre topici ce in de
imagine (e.g., 1992, confruntarea final din 1996, prima confruntare din 2014).
20
n ceea ce privete cercetarea deductiv, din cele trei ipoteze principale la care au fost
adugate nc zece ipoteze de cercetare secundare impuse de modelul teoretic au fost confirmate
n urma cercetrii apte dintre acestea (I1, I1-1, I2, I2_1, I2_2, I2_3, I2_5), iar patru au fost
infirmate (I1_2, I2_4, I2_6, I3). Astfel, s-a confirmat c: (1) aclamaiile sunt mai frecvente dect
atacurile, iar acestea sunt mai frecvente dect mecanismele defensive; (2) poziia politic
influeneaz utilizarea funciilor de atac i aclamare puin i n sens negativ (i.e., cu ct este mai
influent poziia politic - poziie de putere, cu att candidatul utilizeaz mai puin atacul); (3)
enunurile cu privire la politic au o frecven mai mare dect enunurile cu privire la character;
(4, 5) prezideniabilii romni au folosit enunuri cu privire la obiectivele generale i la idealuri
mai mult pentru a aclama dect pentru a ataca; (6) exist o asociere ntre utilizarea temelor care
vizeaz planurile de viitor i obiectivele generale n mesajele politice cu funcie de aclamare i
atac, ns aceast asociere este foarte slab, iar relaia este invers celei specificate de ipotez,
prezideniabilii romni aclamnd mai mult n discursul axat pe planurile acestora de viitor dect
n prezentarea obiectivelor generale; i (7) candidaii aflai la putere i axeaz discursul mai
mult pe aspecte politice dect de imagine.
21
ara Aclamaii Atacuri Msuri defensive
1
Datele nu includ rezultatele modelului funcional pentru dezbaterea prezidenial din 1990
22
2014 Victor Ponta 26% 54% 19%
Klaus Iohannis 25% 52% 23%
Mircea Geoan 37% 37% 26%
2009
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Distribuia funciilor mesajelor politice n discursurile candidailor din cadrul dezbaterilor prezideniale
Dintre prezideniabilii care au utilizat cel mai frecvent funcia de aprare n discursul lor
i menionez pe Ion Iliescu (MD: 37% - 1992) i Adrian Nstase (MD: 32% - 2004), ambii
utiliznd strategii defensive, ntr-o msur mai mare dect atacurile. i chiar dac pe Iliescu nu
l afecteaz n mod direct deoarece vulnerabilitatea dat de lipsa de experien a
contracandidatului su este mai mare, pe Nstase l-a afectat prin evidenierea unor
vulnerabiliti precum corupia din structurile partidului de guvernmnt. Nstase greete
concentrndu-se prea mult pe atacurile la adresa lui, n loc s-i dezvolte propria linie de atac,
el pstrnd un discurs implicit presrat cu ironii subtile la adresa candidatului care nu fac ns
fa atacului direct, explicit al lui Traian Bsescu.
Putem observa din figura de mai jos cum orientarea discursului spre imagine a fost mai
vizibil n cadrul dezbaterilor din 1996 i 2014, cnd nregistrm o rat crescut a atacurilor i
n cazul lui Ion Raiu, n 1990, n care topicile cu privire la imaginea candidailor sunt utilizate
att n autoprezentare, ct i n atac.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Politic Caracter
Distribuia topicilor mesajelor politice n discursurile candidailor din cadrul dezbaterilor prezideniale
Campania
Dezbaterea Tematica dezbaterilor
prezidenial
25
- ordinea prioritar a planurilor de viitor i tendinele
polarizrii politice situaia economic a rii i planuri
de viitor cu privire la mbuntirea acesteia;
- motenirea comunist;
- privatizarea industriei;
- situaia agriculturii i perspective de viitor
- iniiativa privat
- rolul i istoricul n sistemul comunist al celor doi
candidai;
- respectarea Constituiei i a statului naional;
- atribuiile preedintelui prevzute de Constituie;
- orientarea spre monarhie a CDR-ului i a lui Emil
7 octombrie: Emil Constantinescu;
Constantinescu i - consolidarea instituiilor fundamentale statului: Poliia,
Ion Iliescu Jandarmeria i Procuratura;
- activitile Procuraturii cu privire la dosarele
mineriadelor i implicarea politic a preedintelui fa
de aceste activiti;
- numirea directorului SRI;
- reforma i tranziia n Romnia postcomunist;
- descentralizarea economic i administrativ.
- rolul statului n economie;
1992 - relaia guvern sindicate patronate;
- mbuntirea imaginii Romniei n strintate;
- protecia social a femeilor;
- restructurarea economic;
- responsabilitatea guvernrii;
8 octombrie: - alianele electorale;
- relaia cu sindicatele:
Emil
- criza economic;
Constantinescu i
- investiii n agricultur;
Ion Iliescu
- problema integritii naionale: stat naional sau stat
multinaional;
- acordul cu FMI;
- tratatul cu URSS, puciul de la Moscova;
- relaia cu Comisia European i NATO;
- lobbyul romnesc n strintate;
- protecia social i corupia.
- activitatea preedintelui din punct de vedere
constituional;
- politica extern;
11 noiembrie: - aprarea i respectarea Constituiei;
Emil - intervenia preedintelui n relaia dintre stat i
1996 societate i conceptul de unitate naional;
Constantinescu i
Ion Iliescu - relaia Romniei cu Occidentul i cu Rusia;
- situaia socio-economic a rii;
- orientrile monarhice ale lui Constantinescu;
- dreptul la proprietate;
- sistemul de justiie;
26
- corupia, autonomia i minoritile naionale;
- datoriile externe;
- valorile religioase ale lui Iliescu;
- economie, bunstare i reforma social-economic;
- politica extern: aderarea la structurile europene i
nord-atlantice;
- sigurana public;
14 noiembrie: - schimbrile legislativ;
Emil - educaia;
Constantinescu i - orientrile monarhice ale lui Constantinescu;
Ion Iliescu - orientri religioase;
- relaia cu Rusia;
- conduita moral;
- realizrile mandatului precedent;
- orientare ideologic;
- asocierea cu diverse persoane.
- implicarea politicului n justiie;
- exemple de fraud electoral;
- relaia candidailor cu PRM,
- situaia socio-economic, transporturile i lipsa
autostrzilor;
- rolul preedintelui n cadrul CSAT i cu privire la
8 decembrie: activitatea serviciilor de informaii;
2004 Traian Bsescu i - politica extern;
Adrian Nstase - politica de fiscalitate;
- strategii i numiri publice viitoare n cazul n care vor
ctiga alegerile;
- relaia cu U.E.;
- privatizarea unor societi de stat;
- negocieri politice pentru formarea majoritii
parlamentare.
- proiecte de viitor: economia, corupia
- rolul preedintelui;
- aliane politice;
- relaia dintre instituiile statului i preedinie,
3 decembrie: - politica extern: problematica Ucrainei, relaiile
2009 Traian Bsescu i romno-ruse, securitatea naional,
Mircea Geoan - Investiii strine i mediul de afaceri;
- numiri n funcii publice;
- Constituia;
- educaia;
- sistemul medical
- votul n diaspora i votul prin coresponden;
- politica extern;
11 noiembrie: - corupia;
2014 Klaus Iohannis i - ngrijorrile Fondului Monetar Internaional;
Victor Ponta - colaborarea (inter)instituional;
- bugetul Romniei;
- situaia privind exploatrile de la Roia Montan;
27
- cunoaterea comunitilor istorice de romni;
- imunitatea parlamentar;
- creterea taxelor i impozitelor;
- creterea economic;
- motivaia pentru care candidaii ar trebui s ctige
preedinia Romniei;
- votul n diaspora;
- justiia;
- proiectele de viitor;
12 noiembrie: - situaia economic;
Klaus Iohannis i - drepturile minitrilor i a parlamentarilor raportat la
Victor Ponta cele ale masei de ceteni;
- raportul dintre preedinie i instituiile de anchetare
ale corupiei,
- relaia preedinte premier;
- Constituia;
- structura Parlamentului.
Tematicile dezbaterilor postdecembriste din Romnia
Dintre toate acestea, dezbaterile prezideniale au ncadrat de-a lungul timpului cteva
teme recurente precum: (1) comunismul utilizat frecvent i ca simbol condesat pentru a
sublinia trecutul negativ al contracandidatului care nu ar trebui s ajung la guvernare, iar n
anii 90 era invocat motenirea comunist care a ngreunat procesul de dezvolare economic
i social; (2) tranziia utilizat frecvent n anii 90 ca explicaie a dificultii aplicrii
reformelor economice i sociale i a rmnerii n urm provocat de motenirea comunist sau
de guvernele anterioare; (3) orientarea spre Est sau Vest, spre Rsrit sau Occident
invocat mai ales n polarizrile construite de ctre candidaii de dreapta pentru a sublinia
vasalitatea fa de Rusia a candidailor de stnga; (4) relaia cu America ncepnd cu 1996,
att candidaii de dreapta, ct i cei de stnga susin relaia cu SUA, aceasta fiind un simbol al
prosperitii economice i al securitii internaionale la care poporul romn a aspirat nc
dinainte de 1989; (5) corupia ncepnd cu 1992, aceasta reprezint unul dintre principalele
subiecte ale dezbaterilor prezideniale romneti, ea fiind privit ca o problem ce ine de
responsabilitate a liderului de partid (prezideniabilul) fa de evoluia fenomenului n cadrul
structurilor guvernamentale i de partid.
Dezbaterile 1992-1996 au din punct de vedere tematic un caracter repetitiv, ntruct sunt
reluate teme discutate n confruntrile electorale anterioare, o mare parte a tematicii dezbaterilor
din 1992 putnd fi regsite n structura celor din 1996. Acestea este i cazul celor din 2009-
2014, unde apar ca teme pregnante scandalul (personal, politic, de corupie) i nevoia de unitate.
28
n general, a doua parte a campaniilor electorale pentru alegerile prezideniale manifest
o bipolaritate politic stabilit chiar prin rezultatele primului tur de scrutin; de la dezbaterile din
1992 i pn la cele din 2014 s-a meninut o continu bipolaritate stnga dreapta n ceea ce
privete actorii care au intrat n al doilea tur de scrutin al alegerilor prezideniale i formaiunile
politice care le-a oferit sprijinul principal. Din punct de vedere discursiv aceast opoziie a fost
frecvent exploatat n polarizrile transmise de ctre candidaii de dreapta, candidaii de stnga
fiind asociai cu o orientare spre Est, mai precis spre Rusia (1990, 1992, 1996, 2009), cu afilieri
comuniste pregnante n trecut (1990, 1992, 1996, 2004), cu politici sociale supradimensionate
vzute adesea i ca pomeni electorale (1990, 1996, 2004, 2014) i cu dezvoltarea i sprijinirea
fenomenului de corupie (1992, 1996, 2004, 2009, 2014). Acestei asocieri i s-au atribuit de-a
lungul timpului principalei formaiuni de stnga, PSD (sub toate transformrile sale: FSN,
FDSN, PDSR), cel mai longeviv partid politic la guvernare i care a avut n toate finalele
prezideniale cte un candidat afiliat acesteia.
Din punct de vedere ideologic, aceast opoziie stnga- dreapta nu este ns att de clar
la nivel discursiv, prezideniabilii folosind att prezumii politice de dreapta ct i de stnga n
argumentarea programelor lor de guvenare (1990, 1992, 1996), mai ales n cazurile n care a
existat o alian, care sprijinea candidatul, format din partide de la poli opui (e.g., 2009, 2014).
Acest fapt demonstreaz c nu exist diferene ideologice fundamentale ntre actorii politici i
ntre formaiunile politice de pe eichierul politic romnesc, dezvoltndu-se treptat, tot mai mult
ideologii de grani precum ideologia populist prin care politicienii se identific cu poporul
(poznd ca oameni de rnd, oameni obinuii) i adopt un discurs simplist, ncrcat emoional;
astfel, mai ales n perioada electoral, putem observa o orientare puternic de stnga a
candidailor care erau afiliai unor partide de dreapta (e.g., Bsescu).
29
Politica Character
1992 206 (38%) 46 (8%) 127 (23%) 133 (24%) 9 (2%) 26 (5%)
Total 651 (24%) 261 (10%) 558 (21%) 828 (31%) 153 (6%) 241 (9%)
30
2014 Klaus Iohannis 18% 7% 22% 42% 8% 3%
Victor Ponta 15% 7% 23% 42% 10% 2%
Mircea Geoan 17% 12% 29% 37% 1% 3%
2009
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Realizri anterioare Planuri viitoare Obiective generale Calitati personale Abi l itai de l ider Idealuri
31
unor emoii puternice). De altfel, emoiile dau for argumentrii i susin procesul de
spectacularizare. Ca strategie pozitiv utilizat la nivel general de prezideniabili, dar n situaii
mai restrnse este consensul care se constituie ca o strategie comun bazat pe interesul
naional (1990, 1992, 1996, 2004, 2014).
Ca o ultim observaie general menionez c funciile mesajelor politice pot fi regsite,
din punct de vedere strategic, cel mai adesea n urmtoarele situaii: aclamaiile n
autoprezentri sau n analiza propriei poziii politice, atacurile n cadrul unor argumente de tip
ad hominem bazate pe analiza poziiei adversarului, iar mecanismele defensive n strategii de
negare.
34
30. Beciu, Camelia, (2000), Politica discursiv: Practici politice ntr-o campanie
electoral, Iai, Polirom;
31. Beciu, Camelia, (2002), Comunicare politic, Bucureti, comunicare.ro;
32. Beciu, Camelia, (2011), Sociologia comunicrii i a spaiului public, [Adobe Digital
Edition], Iai, Polirom, preluat de pe http://www.elefant.ro;
33. Beciu, Camelia, (2015), Dezbaterile electorale i rolul mediei n campania
prezidenial 2014 din Romnia, n Revista romn de sociologie, Anul XXVI, nr 3-4, pp. 253
- 278;
34. Beck, Ulrich, (1994), The Reinvention of Politics: Towards a Theory of Reflexive
Modernization, n Beck, Ulrich; Giddens, Anthony i Lash, Scott Reflexive Modernization:
Politics, Tradition and Aesthetics in the Modern Social Order, Cambridge, Polity Press, pp. 1
55;
35. Beck, Ulrich i Willms, Johannes, (2004), Conversations with Ulrich Beck, Cambridge,
Polity Press;
36. Bennett, Lance W. i Entman, Robert M., (2001), Mediated Politics: An Introduction,
n Bennett, Lance W. i Entman, Robert M. (coord.), Mediated politics: communication in the
future of democracy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp. 1-29;
37. Bennett, Lance W., (1996), News: the politics of illusion, New York, Longman;
38. Bennett, Lance W., i Iyengar, Shanto, (2008), A new era of minimal effects? The
changing foundation of political communication, n Journal of Communication, vol. 58 (4),
pp. 707-731;
39. Bennett, Lance W., i Iyengar, Shanto, (2010), The shifting foundations of political
communication: Responding to a defense of the media effects paradigm, n Journal of
Communication, vol. 60 (1), pp. 35-39; Benoit,
40. William L., (1999), Seeing spots: A functional analysis of presidential television
advertisements, 1952-1996, Westport, Praeger;
41. Benoit, William L., (2007), Determinants of Defense in Presidential Debates, n
Communication Research Reports, vol. 24 (4), pp. 319-325;
42. Benoit, William L., (2014), Political Election Debates: Informing Voters about Policy
and Character, Lanham, Maryland, Lexington Books;
43. Benoit, William L. i Klyukovski, Andrew A., (2006), A functional analysis of 2004
Ukrainian presidential debates, n Argumentation, vol. 20 (2), pp. 209 225;
44. Benoit, William L. i Sheafer, Tamir, (2006), Functional theory and political
discourse: Televised debates in Israel and the United States, n Journalism & Mass
Communication Quarterly, vol.83 (2), pp. 281-297;
45. Benoit, William L.; Pier, P. M.; Brazeal, LeAnn M.; McHale, John P.; Klyukovski,
Andrew i Airne, David, (2002), The primary decision: A functional analysis of debates in
presidential primaries, Westport, Praeger Publishers;
46. Beom, Khisu, (2010), Face Threatening/Supporting Strategies in Korean and American
TV Presidential Debates: A Cultural Comparative Study, n Intercultural Communication
Studies vol .XIX (2);
47. Berger, Peter L. i Luckmann, Thomas, (2008), Construirea social a realitii,
Bucureti, Editura ART;
35
48. Bhaskar, Roy, (2009), Scientific Realism and Human Emancipation with a new
Introduction, Abingdon, Routledge;
49. Blumler, Jay G. (1990) Elections, the Media and the Modern Publicity Process, n
Ferguson, Marjorie (coord.), Public Communication: The New Imperatives, Londra, Sage
Pubications, pp.101-114;
50. Blumler, Jay G. (2001) The Third Age of Political Communication, n Journal of
Public Affairs, vol.1 (3), pp. 201209;
51. Blumler, Jay G. i Gurevitch, Michael, (1995), The Crisis of Public Communication,
Londra, Routledge;
52. Blumler, Jay G. i Gurevitch, Michael, (2001), Americanization Reconsidered: U.K.
U.S. Campaign Communication Comparisons Across Time, n Bennett, W. Lance i Entman,
Robert M., (coord.), Mediated politics: communication in the future of democracy, Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press, pp. 380-403;
53. Blumler, Jay G. i Kavanagh, Dennis, (1999) The Third Age of Political
Communication: Influences and Features, n Political Communication, vol. 16(3), pp. 209-
230;
54. Boltanski, Luc, (2004), Distant Suffering. Morality, Media and Politics, Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press;
55. Bourdieu, Pierre, (1995), Outline of a Theory of Practice, New York, Cambridge
University Press;
56. Bourdieu, Pierre, (2007), Despre televiziune, Bucureti, Editura Art;
57. Bourdieu, Pierre, (2012a), Despre cmpul politic, Iai, Editura Universitii Al. I.
Cuza;
58. Bourdieu, Pierre, (2012b), Limbaj i putere simbolic, Bucureti, Editura Art;
59. Boydstun, Amber E.; Glazier, Rebecca A. i Phillips, Claire, (2013a), Agenda Control
in the 2008 Presidential Debates, n American Politics Research, vol. 41 (5), pp. 863 899;
60. Boydstun, Amber E.; Glazier, Rebecca A. i Pietryka, Matthew T., (2013b), Playing to
the Crowd: Agenda Control in Presidential Debates, n Political Communication, vol. 30 (2),
pp. 254-277;
61. Brader, Ted i Valentino, Nicholas A., (2007), Identities, Interests, and Emotions:
Symbolic versus Material Wellsprings of Fear, Anger, and Enthusiasm, n Neuman, W.
Russell; Marcus, George E.; Crigler, Ann N. i Mackuen, Michael, (coord.), The Affect Effect:
The Dynamics of Emotion in Political Thinking and Behavior, Chicago, University of Chicago
Press, pp. 180-201;
62. Brants, Kees i Voltmer, Katrin, (2011), Political Communication in Postmodern
Democracy, Londra, Palgrave Macmillan;
63. Braud, Philippe, (2010), Lapport de la science politique ltude des langages du
politique, n Mots. Les langages du politique, nr. 94 (noiembrie 2010), pp. 143-148;
64. Brown, Gillian i Yule George, (1998), Discourse Analysis, Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press;
65. Budzyska-Daca, Agnieszka, (2012), The Idea of Debate and the Rules of Interaction
in Polish Pre-election TV Debates, n Media Studies (Studia Medioznawcze) vol. 48 (1),
36
document electronic: http://sm.id.uw.edu.pl/Numery/2012_1_48/budzynska-en.pdf, consultat
n data de 15.03.2014;
66. Cabasino, Francesca, (2009), La construction de lethos prsidentiel dans le dbat
tlvis franais, n Mots. Les langages du politique, nr. 89/2009, pp. 11-23;
67. Cappella, Joseph N. i Jamieson, Kathleen Hall, (1997), Spiral of Cynicism: The Press
and the Public Good, New York, Oxford University Press;
68. Carlin, Diana B., Morris, Eric i Smith, Shawna, (2001), The influence of format and
questions on candidates' strategic argument choices in the 2000 presidential debates, n
American Behavioral Scientist, vol. 44 (12), pp. 2196-2218;
69. Castells, Manuel, (2009), Communication Power, New York, Oxford University Press;
70. Castells, Manuel, (2012), Networks of Outrage and Hope: Social Movements in the
Internet Age, Cambridge, Polity Press;
71. Chaffee, Steven H., (1978), Presidential debatesare they helpful to voters?, n
Communication Monographs, vol. 45(4), pp. 330-346;
72. Charaudeau, Patrick, (2015), Le dbat prsidentiel. Un combat de mots. Une victoire
aux points ,n Langage et socit 1/2015 (nr. 151) , pp. 109-129;
73. Charaudeau, Patrick i Ghiglione, Rodolphe, (2005), Talk show-ul: despre libertatea
cuvntului ca mit, Iai, Polirom;
74. Chelcea, Septimiu, (2002), Opinia public. Gndesc masele despre ce i cum vor
elitele?, Bucureti, Editura Economic;
75. Chelcea, Septimiu, (2004), Metodologia cercetrii sociologice, Bucureti, Editura
Economic;
76. Chilton, Paul, (2004), Analysing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice, Londra,
Routledge;
77. Chiribuc, Dan i Coma, Mircea, (1999), Despre consum i practica <<timpului
liber>>, n Berevoescu, Ionica et al., Feele schimbrii. Romnii i provocrile tranziiei,
Editura Nemira, pp. 257-269:
78. Cho, Jaeho, i Ha, Yerheen, (2012), On the Communicative Underpinnings of
Campaign Effects: Presidential Debates, Citizen Communication, and Polarization in
Evaluations of Candidates, n Political Communication, vol. 29, pp.184204;
79. Choi, Yun Son i Benoit, William L., (2009) A functional analysis of French and South
Korean debates, n Speaker and Gavel, vol. 46, pp. 59 78;
80. Cismaru, Diana-Maria i Lucaci, Claudiu, (2010), Dezbaterile finale n campania
electoral din toamna 2009: receptarea n mediul real i n mediul online, n Securitate i
aprare european n contextul crizei economico-financiare Bucureti: Universitatea Naional
de Aprare Carol I, pp. 20-32;
81. Cmeciu, Camelia i Ptru, Monica, (2010a), A functional approach to the 2009
Romanian presidential debates. Case study: Crin Antonescu versus Traian Bsescu, n Journal
of Media Research, vol. 1(6), pp. 31-41;
82. Cmeciu, Camelia i Ptru, Monica, (2010b), Dezbaterile electorale un joc discursiv
ritualic, n Sfera politicii, 3(145), pp. 57-63;
37
83. Cobb, Roger W. i Elder, Charles, (1971), The politics of agenda-building: An
alternative perspective for modern democratic theory, n Journal of Politics, vol. 33, (4), pp:
892915;
84. Colas, Dominique, (2004), Sociologie politic, Bucureti, Editura Univers;
85. Coleman, Stephen, (2000), Meaningful Political Debate in the Age of the Soundbite,
n Coleman, Stephen, (coord.), Televised Election Debates, International Perspectives,
Basingstoke i Londra, Macmillan Press Ltd., pp. 1-24;
86. Coman, Mihai, (2003), Mass media n Romnia post-comunist, Iai, Polirom;
87. Coman, Mihai, (2007), Introducere n sistemul mass-media, Iai, Polirom;
88. Corbu, Nicoleta i Boan Mdlina, (2011), Telepreedinii. Radiografia unei campanii
electorale, Bucureti, comunicare.ro;
89. Corcoran, Paul E., (1990), Language and Politics n Swanson, David L. i Nimmo,
Dan, (coord.), New Directions in Political Communication- A Resource Book, Newbury Park,
Sage, pp. 51-85;
90. Corner, John i Pels, Dick, (coord), (2003), Media and the Restyling of Politics, Londra,
Sage;
91. Creswell, John W., (2009), Research Design. Qualitative, quantitative and Mixed
Methods Approaches, Third Edition, Thousand Oaks (CA), Sage Publications;
92. Creu, Florina, (2012), Lights, Camera, Action! How the 2009 Romanian Presidential
Debates Portrayed Political Candidates, n Revista de comunicare relaii publice, vol. 14 (3) ,
pp. 65-89;
93. Curran, James i Seaton, Jean, (2003), Power without responsibility: The press,
broadcasting, and new media in Britain- 6th Edition, Londra i New York, Routledge;
94. Curran, James; Iyengar, Shanto; Brink Lund, Anker i Salovaara-Moring, Inka., (2009),
Media systems, public knowledge and democracy: A comparative study, n European
Journal of Communication, vol. 24, pp. 5-26;
95. Dahl, Robert, (1982), Dilemmas of Pluralist Democracy : Autonomy vs. Control, New
Haven i Londra, Yale University Press;
96. Dalton, Russell, (2002), Citizen Politics: Public Opinion and Political Parties in
Advanced Industrial Democracies, 3rd edition, Chatham (New Jersey), Chatham House;
97. de Vreese, Claes H., (2006), Ten Observations about the Past, Present and the Future
of Political Communication, Amsterdam, Vossiuspers UvA;
98. de Vreese, Claes H. i Boomgaarden Hajo G., (2006), Media Effects on Public Opinion
about the Enlargement of the European Union, n Journal of Common Market Studies, 44 (2),
pp. 419436;
99. de Vreese, Claes H. i Semetko, Holli A., (2002) Cynical and Engaged: Strategic
Campaign Coverage, Public Opinion and Mobilization in a Referendum, n Communication
Research, vol. 29 (6), pp. 615641;
100.DeFleur, Melvin L. i Ball-Rokeach, Sandra, (1999), Teorii ale comunicrii de mas,
Editura. Polirom, Iai;
101.Denton, Robert E. Jr., (1998), Communication Variables and Dynamics of the 1996
Presidential Campaign, n Denton, Robert E. Jr. (coord.), The 1996 Presidential Campaign- A
Communicative Perspective, Westport (CT), Praeger, pp. 1-50;
38
102.Derrida, Jacques, (2008), Despre gramatologie, Cluj-Napoca, Editura Tact;
103.Devlin, L. Patrick, (1995) Political commercials in American presidential elections,
n Kaid, Lynda Lee i Holtz-Bacha, Christina (coord.) Political Advertising in Western
Democracies: Parties and Candidates on Television, Thousand Oaks (CA), Sage Publications,
pp. 186-205;
104.Dobek Ostrowska, Bogustawa i Ldzi, Bartolomiej, (2008), Election News
Coverage in Poland n Strmbck, Jesper i Kaid, Lynda Lee (coord.), The Handbook of
Election News Coverage Around the World, New York, Routledge, pp. 226-245;
105.Dobrei, Nicolae-Emanuel i Molocea, Andreea, (2012), Liberalismul, n Miroiu,
Mihaela (coord.), Ideologii politice actuale: semnificaii, evoluii i impact, Iai, Polirom, pp.
37- 69;
106.Dobrescu, Paul, (1997), Iliescu contra Iliescu. Analiz din interior a campaniei
electorale din 1996, Bucureti, Editura Diogene;
107.Domas White, Marilyn i Marsh, Emily, (2006), Content Analysis: A Flexible
Methodology, n Library Trends, vol. 55, nr. 1, pp. 22-45;
108.Donsbach, Wolfgang, (2006), The identity of communication research, n Journal of
Communication, vol. 56 (3), pp. 437-448;
109.Dorna, Alexandre, (1995), Les effets langagiers du discours politique, n Hrmes,
nr.16, pp.131-146;
110.Downes, Larry i Mui, Chunka, (2000), Unleashing the Killer App: Digital Strategies
for Market Dominance, Boston, Harvard Business School Press;
111.Drgan, Ioan, (2008), Comunicarea- vol II., Bucureti, Editura Rao;
112.Druckman, James N., (2003), The Power of Television Images: The First Kennedy-
Nixon Debate Revisited, n The Journal of Politics, vol. 65(2), pp. 559571;
113.Dumitrescu, Lucian-tefan, (2011), Efectele sociale ale neoliberalismului. Doctrina
ocului n Rusia, China i Romnia, n Revista Romn de Sociologie, serie nou, anul XXII,
nr. 56, pp. 525543;
114.Dudek, Patrycja i Partacz, Sawomir, (2009), Functional theory of political discourse.
Televised debates during the parliamentary campaign in 2007 in Poland, n Central
European Journal of Communication, vol.2 (2), pp. 367-379;
115.Duu, Alesandru, (2010), Revoluia din decembrie 1989. Cronologie, Ediia a II a,
Craiova, Editura SITECH, disponibil online http://irrd.ro/wp-
content/uploads/2014/05/cronologia2.pdf, accesat n perioada aprilie-mai 2015 ;
116.Edelman, Murray, (1984), The Political Language of the Helping Professions, n
Shapiro, Michael, (coord), Language and Politics, New York, New York University Press, pp.
44 60;
117.Elgie, Robert, (2014), Televised presidential debates, document electronic, sursa:
http://presidential-power.com/?p=1203, accesat n 2.11.2014;
118.Esser, Frank i Pfetsch, Barbara, (2004), Comparing Political Communication:
Reorientations in a Changing World, n Esser, Frank i Pfetsch, Barbara, (coord.) Comparing
Political Communication. Theories, Cases and Challenges, Cambridge, Cambridge University
Press, pp. 3- 22;
39
119.Faas, Thorsten i Maier, Jrgen, (2004), Chancellor-candidates in the 2002 televised
debates, n German Politics, vol. 13 (2), pp. 300 316;
120.Fairclough, Isabela i Fairclough, Norman, (2012), Political Discourse Analysis. A
Method for Advanced Students, Abingdon, Routledge;
121.Fairclough, Norman, (1989), Language and Power, New York, Longman;
122.Fairclough, Norman, (1995), Critical discourse analysis: the critical study of language,
Londra i New York, Longman;
123.Fairclough, Norman, (2000), Discourse, Social Theory and Social Research: The
Discourse of Welfare Reform, n Journal of Sociolinguistics, vol.4(2), pp.163-195;
124.Fairclough, Norman i Wodak, Ruth, (1997), Critical discourse analysis, n van Dijk
(Ed.), Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction, vol. 2, Londra, Sage Publication,
pp. 258-284;
125.Farnsworth, Stephen J. i Lichter, Robert S., (2003), The Nightly News Nightmare:
Network Televisions Coverage of US Presidential Elections, 19882000, Lanham, Rowman
and Littlefield;
126.Farrell, David M. i Schmitt-Beck, Rdiger, (2002), Do Political Campaigns Matter?:
Campaign Effects in Elections and Referendums, Londra, Taylor & Francis Routledge;
127.Ferdinand, Peter, (2003), Cyber democracy, n Axtmann, Rolland, Understanding
Democratic Politics: An Introduction, Londra, Sage, pp. 207-216;
128.Foucault, Michel, (1998), Ordinea discursului, Bucureti, EUROSONG & BOOK;
129.Foucault, Michel, (1999), Arheologia cunoaterii, Bucureti, Editura Univers;
130.Freelon, Deen i Karpf, David, (2015), Of big birds and bayonets: hybrid Twitter
interactivity in the 2012 Presidential debates, n Information, Communication & Society, vol.
18 (4), pp. 390-406;
131.Fridkin, Kim L.; Kenney, Patrick J.; Gershon, Sarah Allen i Woodall, Gina Serignese,
(2008), Spinning Debates:The Impact of the News Medias Coverage of the Final 2004
Presidential Debate, n The International Journal of Press/Politics, vol. 13 (1), pp. 29-51;
132.Friedenberg, Robert V., (1994), Patterns and Trends in National Political Debates:
1990 1992, n Friedenberg, Robert V. (coord.), Rhetorical Studies of National Political
Debates, 1960-1992, Westport, Praeger Publisher, pp. 235-260;
133.Friedenberg, Robert V., (1998), The 1996 Presidential Debates, n Denton, Robert E.
Jr. (coord.), The 1996 Presidential Campaign- A Communicative Perspective, Westport (CT),
Praeger, pp. 101-121;
134.Gallagher, Tom, (1998), Democraie i naionalism n Romnia 1989-1998, Bucureti
Editura All;
135.Gallagher, Tom, (2005), The Balkans after the Cold War: from tyranny to tragedy,
Londra, Taylor & Francis e-Library;
136. Gee, James Paul, (2008) Social Linguistics and Literacies. Ideology in discourses,
Abingdon, Routledge;
137.Gerstl, Jacques, (2002), Comunicarea politic, Iai, Institutul European;
138.Gheorghi, Andrei, (2012) Transferuri de voturi, alegtori nereprezentai i nou-venii
n cel de-al doilea tur al competiiei prezideniale din 2009 n Coma, Mircea; Gheorghi,
40
Andrei, i Tufi. Claudiu D. (coord.), Alegerile prezideniale din Romnia, 2009, Cluj-Napoca,
Presa Universitar Clujean;
139.Giddens, Anthony, (1993), New Rules of Sociological Method. A Positive Critique to
Interpretative Sociologies, 2nd Edition, Standford, Standford University Press;
140.Gingras, Anne-Marie, (1995), Largumentation dans les dbats tlvises entre
candidats la Prsidence Amricaine: L appel aux motions comme tactique de persuasion,
n Hermes, nr. 16/2005, pp.187 200;
141.Gingras, Anne-Marie, (2003), Les thories en communication politique, n Gingras,
Anne-Marie, (coord.) La communication politique, Etat des savoirs, enjeux et perspectives,
Sainte-Foy(Quebec), Presses de lUniversit du Qubec, pp. 11-66;
142.Goede, Miguel, (2010), Media, Democracy and Governance, n int Veld, Roeland J.
(coord.), Knowledge Democracy - Consequences for Science, Politics, and Media, Berlin,
Heidelberg, Springer, pp. 113- 124;
143.Gordon, Brett R. i Hartmann, Wesley R., (2013), Advertising Effects in Presidential
Elections, n Marketing Science, vol.32 (1), pp.19-35;
144.Gosselin, Andr, (1995), La communication politique. Cartographie dun champ de
recherch et dactivits, n Hrmes nr.17- 18, pp.17-33;
145.Gottfried, Jeffrey A; Hardy, Bruce W; Winneg, Kenneth M i Jamieson, Kathleen Hall,
(2014), All Knowledge Is Not Created Equal: Knowledge Effects and the 2012 Presidential
Debates, n Presidential Studies Quarterly, vol. 44 (3), pp. 389-409;
146.Graber, Doris A., (2005), Political Communication Faces the 21st Century, n Journal
of Communication, vol. 55 (3), pp. 479-507;
147.Gregory, Stanford W. Jr. i Gallagher, Timothy J., (2002), Spectral analysis of
candidates' nonverbal vocal communication: Predicting U.S. presidential election outcome, n
Social Psychology Quarterly, vol. 65(3), pp. 298- 308;
148.Grennan, Wayne, (1997), Informal Logic: Issues and Techniques, Montreal i Kingston,
McGill- Queens University Press;
149.Grice, Paul H., (1995), Logic and conversation, n Grice, Paul H., Studies in the Way of
Words, Cambridge (Massachusetts), Harvard University Press, pp. 3 57;
150.Gross, Peter, (2004), Mass media i democraia n rile Europei de est, Iai, Polirom;
151.Gurevitch, Michael i Blumer, Jay G., (1990), Comparative research: the extending
frontier, n Swanson, David L. i Nimmo, Dan, (coord), New Directions in Political
Communication- A Resource Book, Newbury Park (California), Sage Publications Inc., pp. 305-
325;
152.Gurevitch, Michael i Blumer, Jay G., (2004), State of the Art of Comparative Political
Research: Poised for Maturity?, n Esser, Frank i Pfetsch, Barbara, (coord.), Comparing
political Communication Theories, Cases and Challenges, New York, Cambrige University
Press, pp. 325-343;
153.Habermas, Jrgen, (2000), Contiin moral i aciune comunicativ, Bucureti, ALL
Educaional;
154.Habermas, Jrgen, (2005), Sfera public i transformarea ei structural, Bucureti,
comunicare.ro;
41
155.Hacker, Kenneth L. i van Dijk, Jan A.G.M., (2000), What is Digital Democracy, n
Hacker, Kenneth L. i van Dijk, Jan (coord.), Digital Democracy: Issues of Theory and
Practice, Londra, Sage, pp. 1-9;
156.Haine, Rosemarie, (2002), Televiziunea i reconfigurarea politicului: Studii de caz:
alegerile prezideniale din Romnia din anii 1996 i 2000, Iai, Polirom;
157.Hallin, Daniel C. i Mancini, Paolo, (2004), Americanization, Globalization and
Secularization: Understandind the Convergence of Media Systems and Political
Communication, n Esser, Frank i Pfetsch, Barbara, (coord.), Comparing political
Communication Theories, Cases and Challenges, New York, Cambrige University Press, pp.
25-44;
158.Hawthorne, Joshua; Houston, Brian J. i McKinney, Mitchell S., (2013), Live-
Tweeting a Presidential Primary Debate: Exploring New Political Conversations, n Social
Science Computer Review, vol. 31 (5), pp. 552-562;
159.Herbst, Susan, (1993), The meaning of public opinion: citizens' constructions of
political reality, n Media, Culture & Society, vol. 15 (3), pp. 437-454;
160.Hertz, Noreena, (2003), The Silent Takeover. Global Capitalism and the Death of
Democracy, New York, HarperCollins;
161.Holbert, Lance R, (2005), A Typology for the Study of Entertainment Television and
Politics, n American Behavioral Scientist, vol. 49 (3), pp. 436-453;
162.Holbert, Lance R. i Bucy, Erik P., (2011), Advancing Methods and Measurement.
Supporting Theory and Keeping Pace with the Modern Political Communication Environment,
n Bucy, Erik P. i Holbert, Lance R., (coord.), The Sourcebook for Political Communication
Research. Methods, Measures, and Analytical Techniques, New York, Routledge, pp. 3 - 15 ;
163.Holz-Bacha, Christina, (2004), Political Campaign Communication Conditional
Convergence of Modern Media Election, n Esser, Frank i Pfetsch, Barbara, (coord.),
Comparing political Communication Theories, Cases and Challenges, New York, Cambrige
University Press, pp. 213-230;
164.Houston, Brian J.; McKinney, Mitchell S.; Hawthorne, Joshua i Spialek, Matthew L.,
(2013), Frequency of Tweeting During Presidential Debates: Effect on Debate Attitudes and
Knowledge, n Communication Studies, vol. 64 (5), pp. 548-560;
165.Howarth, David i Stavrakakis, Yannis, (2000), Introducing discourse theory and
political analysis, n Howarth, David; Norval, Aletta J. i Stavrakakis, Yannis, (coord.)
Discourse Theory and political analysis. Identities, hegemonies and social change, Manchester,
Manchester University Press, pp. 1-23;
166.Hrbkov, Lenka i Zagrapan, Jozef ,(2014), Slovak political debates: Functional theory
in a multi-party system, n European Journal of Communication, vol. 29(6), pp. 735744;
167.Iancu, Alice, (2012a), Social-Democraia, n Miroiu, Mihaela (coord.), Ideologii
politice actuale: semnificaii, evoluii i impact, Iai, Polirom, pp. 70-104;
168.Iancu, Alice, (2012b), Cretin-Democraia, n Miroiu, Mihaela (coord.), Ideologii
politice actuale: semnificaii, evoluii i impact, Iai, Polirom, pp. 138-164;
169.Iecu, Isabela, (2006), Discourse Analysis and Argumentation Theory: Analytical
Framework and Applications, Bucureti, Editura Universitii din Bucureti;
170.Ilu, Petru, (1997), Abordarea calitativ a socioumanului, Iai, Polirom;
42
171.Isotalus, Pekka, (2011), Analyzing presidential debates: Functional theory and Finnish
political communication culture, n Nordicom Review, vol.32(1), pp. 3143;
172.Isotalus, Pekka i Aarnio, Eeva, (2006), A Model of Televised Election Discussion:
The Finnish Multi-party System Perspective, n Javnost The Public, vol. 13 (1), pp. 61-71;
173.Iyengar, Shanto; Peters, Mark D. i Kinder, Donald R., (1982), Experimental
Demonstrations of the Not-So-Minimal Consequences of Television News Programs, n The
American Political Science Reivew, vol. 76 (4), pp. 848858;
174.Iyengar, Shanto; Curran, James; Brink Lund, Anker; Salovaara-Moring, Inka; Kyu,
Hahn S. i Coen, Sharon, (2010), Cross-national versus individual-level differences in political
information: A media systems perspective, n Journal of Elections: Public Opinion, and
Parties, vol. 20, pp. 291-310;
175.Jackson, Brooks i Jamieson, Kathleen Hall, (2007), UNSPUN : Finding Facts in a
World of Disinformation, New York, Random House Trade Paperbacks;
176.Jacobs, Lawrence R. i Shapiro, Robert Y., (1994), Issues, Candidate Image, and
Priming: The Use of Private Polls in Kennedys 1960 Presidential Campaign n American
Political Science Review, vol. 88 (3), pp. 527-540;
177.Jamieson, Kathleen Hall i Birdsell, David S., (1988), Presidential Debates. The
Challenge Of Creating an Informed Electorate, New York i Oxford, Oxford University Press;
178.Jamieson, Kathleen Hall, (1992), Dirty politics: Deception, distraction and democracy,
New York, Oxford University Press;
179.Jamieson, Kathleen Hall, (2000), Everything you think about politics... and why youre
wrong, New York, Basic Books;
180.Jarvis, Sharon E. i Han, Soo-Hye, (2009), Political Communication, n Eadie, William
E. (coord.), 21st Century Communication- A Reference Handbook, vol. II, Los Angeles, Sage
Publications, pp. 749 757;;
181.Jaworski, Adam i Galasiski, Dariusz, (2000), Unilateral Norm Breaking in a
Presidential Debate: Lech Walesa Versus Aleksander Kwasniewski, n Research on Language
& Social Interaction, vol. 33(3), pp. 321 345;
182.Johnson, Jessica M., (2005), Feminine style in presidential debate discourse, 1960-
2000, n Communication Quarterly, vol. 53 (1), pp. 3-20;
183.Johnstone, Barbara, (2008), Discourse Analysis 2nd Edition, Malden, Blackwell
Publishing;
184.Kaid, Lynda Lee, (1997), Effects of the television spots on image of Dole and Clinton,
n American Behavioral Scientist; vol.44 (12), pp. 2338-2369;
185.Kaid, Lynda Lee i Holtz-Bacha, Christina, (1995a), An Introduction to Parties and
Candidates on Television, n Kaid, Lynda Lee i Holtz-Bacha, Christina (coord.) Political
Advertising in Western Democracies: Parties and Candidates on Television, Thousand Oaks
(CA), Sage Publications; pp. 8-18;
186.Kaid, Lynda Lee i Holtz-Bacha, Christina, (1995b), Political advertising across
cultures: Comparing content, styles and effects, n Kaid, Lynda Lee i Holtz-Bacha, Christina,
(coord.), Political Advertising in Western Democracies: Parties and Candidates on Television,
Thousand Oaks (CA), Sage Publications, pp. 206-227;
43
187.Kaid, Lynda Lee i Holtz-Bacha, Christina, (2008), Encyclopedia of political
communication, Thousand Oaks (CA), Sage Publications;
188.Kaid, Lynda Lee, (2004), Introduction and Overview of the Field, n Kaid, Lynda Lee,
(coord.), Handbook of Political Communication, Mahwah (New Jersey), Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Inc., Publisher, pp. xiii-xviii;
189.Kaid, Lynda Lee; McKinney, Mitchell S. i Tedesco, John C., (2009), Applied
Political Communication Research n Frey, Lawrence R. i Cissna, Kenneth N., (coord.),
Routledge Handbook of Applied Communication Research, New York, Routledge, pp. 453-480;
190.Kaniok, Petr i Hlouek, Vt, (2013), Europe and the Czech Presidential Election of
January 2013, n EPERN Election Briefing, Brighton - EPERN, Sussex European Institute, No
72, document disponibil online la adesa:
https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=epern-election-briefing-no-
72.pdf&site=266, consultat n 12.05.2014;
191.Keller, Reiner, (2012), Entering Discourses: A New Agenda for Qualitative Research
and Sociology of Knowledge, n Qualitative Sociology Review, vol. 8(2), pp. 46-75;
192.Kendell, Kathleen, (1997), The 1996 Clinton Dole Presidential Debates: Through
Media Eyes n Friedenberg, Robert V., (coord.), Rhetorical Studies of National Political
Debates 1996, Westport, Praeger Publisher, pp. 1-29;
193.Kenski, Kate i Jamieson, Kathleen Hall, (2011), Presidential and Vice Presidential
Debates in 2008: A Profile of Audience Composition, n American Behavioral Scientist, vol.
55 (3), pp. 307-324;
194.Kenski, Kate i Stroud, Natalie Jomini, (2005), Who Watches Presidential Debates? A
Comparative Analysis of Presidential Debate Viewing in 2000 and 2004, n American
Behavioral Scientist, vol. 49 (2), pp. 213-228;
195.Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Catherine, (2012), Analyse du discours : le cas des dbats
politiques tlviss, prezentare n cadrul Congrs Mondial de Linguistique Franaise CMLF
2012, SHS Web of Conferences, vol. 1, pp. 25-42, disponibil online la adresa: http://www.shs-
conferences.org/articles/shsconf/pdf/2012/01/shsconf_cmlf12_000338.pdf, consultat n
15.03.2014
196.Khang, Hyoungkoo, (2008), A cross-cultural perspective on videostyles of presidential
debates in the US and Korea, n Asian Journal of Communication, vol.18(1), pp. 47-63;
197.Kinder, Donald R., (1998), Attitude and action in the realm of politics, n Gilbert, Daniel
Todd; Fiske, Susan T. i Lindzey, Gardner, (coord), Handbook of Social Psychology, 4th
edition, New York, McGraw-Hill, pp. 778-867;
198.Kirk, Rita i Schill, Dan, (2011), A Digital Agora: Citizen Participation in the 2008
Presidential Debates, n American Behavioral Scientist, vol. 55 (3), pp. 325-347;
199.Kraus, Sydney, (2011), Televised Presidential Debates and Public Policy, New York,
Routledge;
200.Kries, Hanspeter, (2004), Strategic Political Communication Mobilizing Public
Opinion in <<Audiences Democracies>>, n Esser, Frank i Pfetsch, Barbara, (coord.),
Comparing political Communication Theories, Cases and Challenges, New York, Cambrige
University Press, pp. 184-212;
44
201.Kuhn, Raymond, (2013), The Media and the 2012 Presidential Election, n Modern
& Contemporary France, vol. 21 (1), pp. 1-16;
202.Kuhn, Thomas, (1970), The Structure od Scientific Revolutions, 2nd Edition, Enlarged,-
International Encyclopedia of Unified Science, vol II, nr. 2, Chicago, The University of
Chicago;
203.Laclau, Ernesto, (2007), Discourse, n Goodin, Robert E.; Pettit, Philip i Pogge,
Thomas, (coord.), A companion to contemporary political philosophy, 2nd Edition, Malden,
Blackwell Publishing, pp. 541 - 547;
204.Laclau, Ernesto i Mouffe, Chantal, (2001), Hegemony and Socialist Strategy.Towards
a Radical Democratic Politics. 2nd Edition, Londra i New York, Verso
205.LaMarrel, Heather L. i Walther, Whitney, (2013), Ability Matters: Testing the
Differential Effects of Political News and Late-Night Political Comedy on Cognitive Responses
and the Role of Ability in Micro-Level Opinion Formation, n International Journal of Public
Opinion Research, vol. 25 (3), pp. 303-322;
206.Lau, Richard R., Sigelman, Lee i Rovner, Ivy Brown, (2007), The Effects of Negative
Political Campaigns: A Meta-Analytic Reassessment, n Journal of Politics, vol.69 (4), pp.
11761209;
207.Lazarsfeld, Paul F., Berelson, Bernard, i Gaudet, Hazel, (2004), Mecanismul votului.
Cum se decid alegtorii ntr-o campanie prezidenial, Bucureti, comunicare.ro;
208.Lee, Cheolhan i Benoit, William L., (2005), A Functional Analysis of the 2002 Korea
Presidential Debates, n Asian Journal of Communication, vol. 15 (2), pp. 115-132;
209.Lees-Marshment, Jennifer, (2010), Global political marketing n Lees-Marshment,
Jennifer; Strmbck, Jesper i Rudd, Chris, Global political marketing, Abingdon, Routledge,
pp. 1-15;
210.Levinson, Stephen C., (1983), Pragmatism, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press;
211.Lilleker, Darren G. i Negrine, Ralph (2002) Professionalization: Of What? Since
When? By Whom? n Press/Politics vol.7, nr. 4, pp. 98-103;
212.Lilleker, Darren G., (2006), Key Concepts in Political Communication, Londra, Sage;
213.Lin, Yang, (2004), Fragmentation of the Structure of Political Communication
Research: Diversification or Isolation? n Kaid, Lynda Lee, (coord.), Handbook of Political
Communication, Mahwah (New Jersey), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publisher, pp. 69
- 107;
214.Lin, Yu-Ru; Margolin, Drew; Keegan Brian; Baronchelli, Andrea i Lazer, David,
(2013), #Bigbirds never die: Understanding social dynamics of emergent hashtags,
n Proceedings of the 7th International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social
Media (ICWSM13), disponibil online la adresa:
http://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/ICWSM/ICWSM13/paper/download/6083/6376, accesat n data
de 3.11.2014;
215.Lippmann, Walter, (1998), Public opinion, New Brumswick, Transaction Publishers;
216.Lowe, Will, (2003), Software for content analysis A Review, articol disponibil
online la adresa: http://kb.ucla.edu/system/datas/5/original/content_analysis.pdf, accesat n
data de 3. 08. 2012;
45
217.Lyotard, Jean-Francois, (1993), Condiia postmodern. Raport asupra cunoaterii,
Bucureti, Editura Babel;
218.Maier, Jrgen i Faas, Thorsten, (2011), Miniature Campaigns in Comparison: The
German Televised Debates, 200209, n German Politics, vol. 20 (1), pp.75-91;
219.Marsh, David; t Hart, Paul i Karen Tindall, (2010), Celebrity Politics: The Politics
of the Late Modernity?, n Political Studies Review, vol. 8, nr.3., pp. 322340;
220.Martel, Guylaine, (2010), La performance communicationnelle en contexte
mdiatique. Lexemple du dbat politique tlvis , n Mots. Les langages du politique, nr.
92/2010, pp. 83-102;
221.Maurer, Marcus i Reinemann, Carsten, (2013), Learning Versus Knowing Effects of
Misinformation in Televised Debates, n Communication Research, vol. 33 (6), pp. 489 506;
222.McCombs, Maxwell E. i Shaw, Donald L., (1972), The Agenda Setting Function of
Mass Media, n Public Opinion Quarterly, vol. 36, pp. 176-187;
223.McKinney, Mitchell S. i Carlin, Diana B, (2004), Political campaign debates, n
Kaid, Lynda Lee, (coord.), Handbook of Political Communication, Mahwah (New Jersey),
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publisher, pp. 203-234;
224.McKinney, Mitchell S. i Warner, Benjamin R., (2013), Do Presidential Debates
Matter? Examining a Decade of Campaign Debate Effects, n Argumentation and Advocacy,
vol.49, pp. 238- 258;
225.McKinney, Mitchell S., Dudash, Elizabeth A. i Hodgkinson, Georgine, (2003),
Viewer Reactions to the 2000 Presidential Debates: Learning Issue and Image Information,
n Kaid, Lynda Lee; Tedesco, John C.; Bystrom, Dianne G. i McKinney, Mitchell S. (coord.)
The Millennium Election Communication in the 2000 Campaign, Lanham, Rowman &
Littlefield Publishers, pp. 43-58;
226.McKinney, Mitchell S., i Chattopadhyay, Sumana, (2007), Political engagement
through debates: Young citizens reactions to the 2004 presidential debates, n American
Behavioral Scientist, vol. 50, pp. 11691182;
227.McKinney, Mitchell S.; Houston, J. Brian. i Hawthorne, Joshua, (2014a), Social
watching a 2012 Republican presidential primary debate, n American Behavioral Scientist,
vol. 58 (4), pp. 556573;
228.McKinney, Mitchell S.; Rill, Leslie A. i Thorson, Esther, (2014b), Civic Engagement
Through Presidential Debates: Young Citizens Political Attitudes in the 2012 Election, n
American Behavioral Scientist, vol. 58 (6), pp. 755-775;
229.McLeod, Douglas M., Kosicki, Gerald M., i McLeod, Jack M., (2002), Resurveying
the boundaries of political communication effects, n Bryant, Jennings i Zillmann, Dolf
(coord.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research, Mahwah (New Jersey), Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, Inc., pp. 215-268;
230.McNair, Brian, (2007), Introducere n comunicarea politic, Iai, Polirom;
231.McQuail, Denis i Windahl, Sven, (2004), Modele ale comunicrii, Bucureti,
comunicare.ro;
232.Mead, George Herbert, (1972) Mind, Self and Society, Chicago i Londra, The
University of Chicago Press;
46
233.Merton, Robert K., (1968), Social Theory and Social Structure - Enlarged edition, New
York, The Free Press;
234.Minow, Newton N. i LaMay, Craig L., (2008), Inside the Presidential Debates Their
Improbable Past and Promising Future, Chicago i Londra, The University of Chicago Press;
235.Miroiu, Adrian, (2006), Fundamentele politicii, vol 1, Iai, Polirom;
236.Miroiu, Mihaela, (2012), Introducere. Ideologii politice: o perspectiv etic, n
Miroiu, Mihaela (coord.), Ideologii politice actuale: semnificaii, evoluii i impact, Iai,
Polirom, pp. 15-35;
237.Miron, Dorina; McKinnon, Lori i Marinescu, Valentina, (1998), Rolul mediilor de
comunicare n alegerile prezideniale din Romnia n 1996, Bucureti, Fundaia Cultural
LIBRA;
238.Moloney, Kevin, (2000), Rethinking public relations: the spin and the substance,
Londra, Routledge;
239.Morello, John T., (1992), The "look" and language of clash: Visual structuring of
argument in the 1988 Bush Dukakis debates, n The Southern Communication Journal, vol.
57(3), pp. 205- 218;
240.Morello, John T., (2005), Questioning the Questions: An Examination of the
Unpredictable 2004 Bush-Kerry Town Hall Debate, n Argumentation and Advocacy, vol.
41, pp. 211-244;
241.Morgan, Marietta, (2009), The Absolutist Advantage: Sacred Rhetoric in
Contemporary Presidential Debate, n Political Communication, vol. 26 (4), pp. 388-411;
242.Morris, Charles, (1985), Fundamentos de la teoria de los signos, Barcelona, Editorial
Paidos;
243.Morris, Eric i Johnson, Jessica M., (2011), Strategic Maneuvering in the 2008
Presidential Debates, n American Behavioral Scientist, vol. 55 (3), pp. 284-306;
244.Mullinix, Kevin J., (2015), Presidential Debates, Partisan Motivations, and Political
Interest, n Presidential Studies Quarterly, vol. 45 (2), pp. 270-278;
245.Mutz, Diana C. i Reeves, Byron, (2005), The new videomalaise: Effects of televised
incivility on political trust, n American Political Science Review, vol. 99 (1), pp. 1-15;
246.Negrine, Ralph, (1996), The Communication of Politics, Londra, Sage Publication;
247.Newman, Bruce I., (1994), The Marketing of the President: Political Marketing as
Campaign Strategy, Londra, Sage;
248.Nicolau, Valentin, (2009), TVR: Mrire i decdere. Televiziunea public n Romnia
i modelele europene, Bucureti, Nemira;
249.Nitz, Michael Cypher, Alyson; Reichert, Tom i Mueller, James E., (2003), Candidates
as Comedy- Political Presidential Humor on Late- Night Television Shows, n Kaid, Lynda
Lee; Tedesco, John C.; Bystrom, Dianne G. i McKinney, Mitchell S. (coord.) The Millennium
Election Communication in the 2000 Campaign, Lanham, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers,
pp. 165- 175;
250.Noelle-Neumann, Elisabeth, (2004), Spirala tcerii. Opinia public - nveliul nostru
social, Bucureti, comunicare.ro;
251.Norris, Pippa, (2000), A virtuous circle: Political Communications in Postindustrial
Societies, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press;
47
252.Norris, Pippa, (2001), Digital Divide: Civic Engagement, Information Poverty, and the
Internet Worldwide, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press;
253.Oldenburg, Christopher, (2015), Re"Characterizing" the Anecdote: Synecdoche and
Ethotic Argument in Presidential Debate Rhetoric, n Communication Studies, vol. 66 (1), pp.
103-120;
254.Onu, Gheorghe, (2014a), Cercetarea sociologic Metodologia cercetrilor
sociologice descriptive. Bazele cercetrii sociologice descriptive. Metoda observaiei, [volumul
2.1], Bucureti, Tritonic;
255.Pasti, Vladimir, (1995), Romnia n tranziie. Cderea spre viitor, Bucureti, Nemira;
256.Pattie, Charles i Johnston, Ron, (2012), A Tale of Sound and Fury, Signifying
Something? The Impact of the Leaders Debates in the 2010 UK General Election, n Fisher,
Justin i Wlezien, Christopher, (coord.) The UK General Election of 2010: Explaining the
Outcome, Abingdon, Routledge, pp. 27-57;
257.Pdureanu, Mihaela-Adriana, (2012), Populismul n Miroiu, Mihaela (coord.),
Ideologii politice actuale: semnificaii, evoluii i impact, Iai, Polirom, pp. 324- 357;
258.Ptru, Monica, (2015), Cadrajele mediatice i dezbaterea prezidenial. Studiu de caz
(Framing the Presidential Debate. Case Study), n POLIS Revist de tiine Politice, vol. III,
Nr. 3 (9), serie nou, pp. 131-147;
259.Ptru, Monica i Cmeciu, Camelia, (2012), Forum Comments a Means of
Embedding the Effects of the TV Debate in the 2009 Presidential Campaign in Romania, n
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 2 (9), pp.
419 434;
260.Pcheux, Michel (1995),Automatic discourse analysis, n Hak, Tony i Helsloot, Niels
(coord.), Michel Pcheux. Automatic discourse analysis Amsterdam, Rodopi, pp.63-121;
261.Pels, Dick, (2003), Aesthetic representation and political style: Rebalancing identity
and difference in media democracy, n Corner John i Pels, Dick, Media and the Restyling of
Politics. Londra, Sage, pp. 41-66 ;
262.Perpelea, Nicolae; Beciu, Camelia; Marinescu, Valentina i tefnescu, Simona, (2002),
Comunicare social i mass-media. Construcia mediatic a opiniei publice deliberative, n
Revista Romn de Sociologie, anul XIII, nr. 12, pp. 85125;
263.Perry, Sheila, (2005), Presidential Debates in France: An Example of
Americanisation?, n Godin, Emmanuel i Chafer, Tony (coord.) The French Exception, New
York i Oxford, Berghahn Books, pp. 139- 150;
264.Pfau, Michael; Houston, J. Brian i Semmler, Shane M., (2005), Presidential Election
Campaigns and American Democracy: The Relationship Between Communication Use and
Normative Outcomes, n American Behavioral Scientist, vol. 49(1); pp. 48-62;
265.Pinkleton, Bruce E. i Austin, Erica W., (2001), Individual Motivations, Perceived
Media Importance and Political Disaffection, n Political Communication, vol.18(3), pp. 321
334;
266.Preda, Cristian, (2015), 25 de ani i cteva sute de partide, Bucureti, Baroque Books
& Arts;
267.Preda, Cristian i Soare, Sorina, (2008), Regimul, partidele i sistemul politic din
Romnia, Bucureti, Nemira;
48
268.Price, Vincent, (1992), Communication Concepts 4: Public Opinion, Newbury Park,
Sage;
269.Prior, Markus, (2005), News vs. Entertainment: How Increasing Media Choice Widens
Gaps in Political Knowledge and Turnout, n American Journal of Political Science, vol. 49
(3), pp. 577592;
270.Prior, Markus, (2007), Post-Broadcast Democracy: How Media Choice Increases
Inequality in Political Involvement and Polarizes Elections, Cambridge, Cambridge University
Press;
271.Prior, Markus, (2012), Who watches presidential debates?, n Public Opinion
Quarterly, vol. 76 (2), pp. 350363;
272.Radu, Alexandru, (2010), Experiena romneasc a alegerii preedintelui republicii,
n Sfera Politicii, vol. XVIII, nr. 1 (143), disponibil online la adresa:
http://www.sferapoliticii.ro/sfera/143/art03-radu.html (accesat n mai 2015);
273.Rmbu, Nicolae, (1997), Filosofia valorilor, Bucureti, Editura Didactic i
Pedagogic;
274.Reinemann, Carsten i Maurer, Marcus, (2005), Unifying or Polarizing? Short-Term
Effects and Postdebate Consequences of Different Rhetorical Strategies in Televised Debates
n Journal of Communication, vol.55, pp. 775 794;
275.Rieffel, Rmy, (2008), Sociologia mass-media, Iai, Polirom;
276.Riffe, Daniel; Lacy, Stephen i Fico, Frederick, (2005), Analyzing Media Messages.
Using Quantitative Content Analysis in Research, [2nd Edition], New Jersey, Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, Publishers;
277.Ritzer, George, (2011), Mcdonaldizarea societii, Bucureti, comunicare.ro;
278.Roitman, Malin, (2014), Presidential candidates ethos of credibility: The case of the
presidential pronoun I in the 2012 HollandeSarkozy debate, n Discourse & Society, Vol.
25(6), pp. 741 765;
279.Rorty, Richard, (1998), Contingen, ironie i solidaritate, Bucureti, Editura All;
280.Rovena - Frumuani, Daniela, (2000), Argumentarea. Modele i strategii, Bucureti,
Editura BIC ALL;
281.Rovena - Frumuani, Daniela, (2012), Analiza discursului: ipoteze i ipostaze,
Bucureti, Tritonic;
282.Rowland, Robert C., (2013), The First 2012 Presidential Campaign Debate: The
Decline of Reason in Presidential Debates, n Communication Studies, vol. 64 (5), pp. 528-
547;
283.Rybacki, Karyn C. i Rybacki, Donald J., (2004), O introducere n arta argumentrii:
pledarea i respingerea argumentelor, Iai, Polirom;
284.Salter, Liora i Hearn, Alison, (coord.), (1996), Outside the Lines: Issues in
Interdisciplinary Research, Montreal, McGill Queens University Press;
285.Sandr, Marion, (2009), Analyse dun dysfonctionnement interactionnel
linterruption dans le dbat de lentre-deux-tours de llection prsidentielle de 2007,
n Mots. Les langages du politique, nr. 89, pp. 69-81;
286.Sandr, Marion, (2010), Dbat politique tlvis et stratgies discursives : la vise
polmique des rats du systme des tours, n Burger, Marcel; Jacquin, Jrme i Micheli,
49
Raphal (coord.). Actes du colloque Le franais parl dans les mdias - Lausanne, 1-4
septembre 2009, Lausanne: Centre de linguistique et des sciences du langage, pp. 1
13, http://www.unil.ch/clsl/page81503.html, consultat n 15 martie 2014;
287.Slvstru, Constantin, (2003), Teoria i practica argumentrii, Iai, Polirom;
288.Slvstru, Constantin, (2009a), Arta dezbaterilor publice, Bucureti, Tritonic;
289.Slvstru, Constantin, (2009b), Discursul puterii, Bucureti, Tritonic;
290.Slvstru, Constantin, (2010), Mic tratat de oratorie, Iai, Editura Universitii
Alexandu Iona Cuza;
291.Scammell, Margaret, (1995), Designer Politics. How Elections are Won, Londra,
Palgrave Macmillan;
292.Scrneci, Florentina, (2007), ndrumar de cercetare calitativ n tiinele socio-umane,
Braov, Editura Universitii Transilvania din Braov;
293.Scheufele, Dietram A. i Tewksbury, David, (2007), Framing, Agenda Setting, and
Priming: The Evolution of Three Media Effects Models, n Journal of Communication, vol.
57(1), pp. 9-20;
294.Scheufele, Dietram A.; Kim Eunkyung i Brossard, Dominique, (2007), My Friends
Enemy How Split-Screen Debate Coverage Influences Evaluation of Presidential Debates, n
Communication Research, vol. 34(1), pp. 3-24;
295.Schiffrin, Deborah, (1994), Approaches to discourse, Oxford, Blackwell Publishers;
296.Schroeder, Alan, (2000), Presidential debates : Forty years of high-risk TV, New York,
Columbia University Press;
297.Schrott, Peter R. i Lanoue, David J., (2013), The Power and Limitations of Televised
Presidential Debates: Assessing the Real Impact of Candidate Performance on Public Opinion
and Vote Choice, n Electoral Studies, vol. 32 (4), pp. 684 - 692;
298.Schwartzenberg, Roger-Grard, (1995), Statul Spectacol- Eseu asupra i mpotriva star-
sistemului n politic, Bucureti, Editura Scripta;
299.Seiter, John. S.; Weger, Harry Jr.; Kinzer, Harold J. i Jensen, Andrea, (2009),
Impression Management in Televised Debates: The Effect of Background Nonverbal Behavior
on Audience Perceptions of Debaters Likeability?, n Communication Research Reports, vol.
26 (1), pp. 1-11;
300.Seiter, John. S.; Weger, Harry Jr.; Jensen, Andrea i Kinzer, Harold J., (2010), The role
of background behavior in televised debates: Does displaying nonverbal agreement and/or
disagreement benefit either debater?, n The Journal of Social Psychology, vol. 150(3), pp.
278-300;
301.Self, John W., (2005), The First Debate over the Debates: How Kennedy and Nixon
Negotiated the 1960 Presidential Debates, n Presidential Studies Quarterly, vol. 35(2), pp.
361-375;
302.Self, John W., (2007), Elections: Debating the 1976 Debates: Establishing a Tradition
of Negotiations, n Presidential Studies Quarterly, vol. 37 (2), pp. 331-348;
303.Semetko, Holli A. i Scammell, Margaret, (2012), Introduction: The Expanding Field
of Political Communication in the Era of Continuous Connectivity, n Semetko, Holli A. i
Scammell, Margaret, The Sage Handbook of Political Communication, Londra, Sage, pp. 1-5;
50
304.Severin, Werner J. i Tankard, James W. Jr, (2004), Perspective asupra teoriilor
comunicrii de mas, Iai, Polirom;
305.Sheckels, Theodorw F. i Bell, Lauren Cohen, (2003), Character versus Competence
Evidence from the 2000 Presidential Debates and Election, n Kaid, Lynda Lee Kaid, Lynda
Lee; Tedesco, John C.; Bystrom, Dianne G. i McKinney, Mitchell S. (coord.) The Millennium
Election Communication in the 2000 Campaign, Lanham, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers,
pp. 59-71;
306.Sheets, Penelope; Domke, David; Al-Sumait, Fahed; Ballantyne, Amanda; Lingle,
Colin; Cordingley, Kaetlyn i Wells, Christopher, (2011), America, America: National
Identity, Presidential Debates, and National Mood, n Mass Communication and Society, vol.
14 (6), pp. 765-786;
307.Silverman, David, (2004), Interpretarea datelor calitative. Metode de a analiz a
comunicrii textului i interaciunii, Iai, Polirom;
308.Smith, Mary Lee; Miller-Kahn, Linda; Heinecke, Walter i Jarvis, Patricia F., (2004),
Political Spectacle. Fate of American Schools, Londra, Routledge;
309.Sovea, Mariana, (2006), Construction de limage prsidentielle dans la campagne
lectorale 2004. Etude de cas: Destinaia Cotroceni, TVR 1, n ANADISS (Revista centrului de
cercetare ANALIZA DISCURSULUI), nr. 1, Suceava, Editura Universitii Suceava, pp. 169-
179;
310.Stanciu, Cristina, (2006), Un modle de stratgie conversationelle dans le dbat
lectoral tlvis: Destinaia Cotroceni, n ANADISS (Revista centrului de cercetare ANALIZA
DISCURSULUI), nr. 1, Suceava, Editura Universitii Suceava, pp. 180-196;
311.Stavre, Ion, (2011), Televiziunea public naional i sistemul media european, n
Schifirne, Constantin (coord.), Europenizarea societii romneti i mass-media, Bucureti,
comunicare.ro, pp. 98-129;
312.Street, John, (2001), Mass Media, Politics and Democracy, Basingstoke, Palgrave;
313.Street, John, (2004), Celebrity Politicians: Popular Culture and Political
Representation, n The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, vol.6, nr.4, pp.
435452;
314.Street, John, (2012), Do Celebrity Politics and Celebrity Politicians Matter? n The
British Journal of Politics and International Relations, vol.14, nr.3, pp. 346356;
315.Strega, Susan, (2005), The View from the Poststructural Margins: Epistemology and
Methodology Resistance, n Brown, Leslie i Strega, Susan, (coord.), Research As Resistance:
Critical, Indigenous, and Anti-Oppressive Approaches, Toronto, Canadian Scholars
Press/Womens Press, pp. 199-235;
316.Sullet-Nylander, Franoise i Roitman, Malin, (2010), De la confrontation
politicojournalistique dans lesgrands duels politiques tlviss: questions et prconstruits, n
Burger, Marcel; Jacquin, Jrme i Micheli, Raphal, (coord.), Actes du colloque Le franais
parl dans les mdias - Lausanne, 1-4 septembre 2009, Lausanne: Centre de linguistique et
des sciences du langage, pp. 119, consultat n 15 martie 2014 de la adresa:
http://www.unil.ch/clsl/page81503.html;
317.Swanson, David L. i Nimmo, Dan, (coord.), (1990), New Directions in Political
Communication- A Resource Book, Newbury Park, Sage;
51
318.Swanson, David L., (2004) Transnational Trends in Political Communication:
Conventional Views and New Realities, n Esser, Frank i Pfetsch, Barbara, (coord.),
Comparing political Communication Theories, Cases and Challenges, New York, Cambrige
University Press, pp. 45-63;
319.tefnescu, Simona i Velicu, Anca, (2006), Tema identitar n discursul candidailor
la preedinie. Studiu de caz, n Revista Romn de Sociologie, anul XVII, nr. 56, pp. 397
432;
320.Tedesco, John C., (2002), Televised Political Advertising Effects: Evaluating
Responses during the 2000 Rob - Allen Senatorial Election, n Journal of Advertising, vol. 31
(1), pp. 37-48;
321.Tedesco, John C. i Kaid, Lynda Lee, (2003), Style and Effects of the Bush and Gore
Spots, n Kaid, Lynda Lee; Tedesco, John C.; Bystrom, Dianne G. i McKinney, Mitchell S.
(coord.) The Millennium Election Communication in the 2000 Campaign, Lanham, Rowman
& Littlefield Publishers, pp. 5-16;
322.Teodorescu, Bogdan, (2005), Campaniile electorale din Romnia. Prezentare
cronologic, n Teodorescu, Bogdan; Guu, Dorina i Enache, Radu, Cea mai bun dintre
lumile posibile.Marketingul politic n Romnia: 1990 2005, Bucureti, comunicare.ro, pp.
35 118;
323.Thomas, Jenny (2013) Meaning in Interaction: An Introduction to Pragmatics,
Abingdon, Routledge;
324.Tonnard, Yvon, (2008), Comments on Strategic Maneuvering in Political
Argumentation , n Argumentation, vol. 22, pp. 331334;
325.Trent, Judith S.; Friedenberg, Robert V. i Denton Jr., Robert E., (2011), Debates in
Political Campaigns n Trent, Judith S.; Friedenberg, Robert V. i Denton Jr., Robert E.,
Political Campaign Communication Principles and Practices, 7th Edition, Lanham, Rowman
& Littlefield Publishers, pp. 257-294;
326.Tsagarousianou, Roza; Tambini, Damian i Bryan, Cathy, (coord.), (1998),
Cyberdemocracy:Technology, cities and civic networks, Londra, Routledge;
327.Turcotte, Jason i Goidel, Kirby R., (2014), Political Knowledge and Exposure to the
2012 US Presidential Debates: Does Debate Format Matter?, n Political Science & Politics,
vol. 47 (2), pp. 449-453;
328.Van Dijk, Jan A.G.M., (2012), Digital Democracy: Vision and Reality, n Snellen Ig,
Thaens, Marcel i van de Donk, Win, Public Administration in the Information Age: Revisited,
Amsterdam, IOS Press, pp.49-62;
329.Van Dijk, Teun A., (1997a), What is political discourse analysis?, n Blommaert, Jan
i Bulcaen, Chris (coord.), Political linguistics, Amsterdam, John Benjamins Publishing, pp.
11-52;
330.Van Dijk, Teun A., (1997b), The Study of Discourse, n van Dijk, Teun A., (coord.),
Discourse as Structure and Process, Londra, Sage Publication, pp. 1-34;
331.Van Dijk, Teun A., (2003), Critical Discourse Analysis, n Schiffrin, Deborah; Tannen,
Deborah i Hamilton, Heidi E. (eds.), Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Malden, Blackwell
Publishing, pp. 352-371;
52
332.Van Dijk, Teun A., (2004a), Discourse, Knowledge and Ideology: Reformulationg Old
Questions and Proposing Some New Solutions. n Ptz, Martin; Neff-van Aertselaer, JoAnne
i van Dijk, Teun A., (coord.), (2004), Communicating ideologies: multidisciplinary
perspectives on language, discourse, and social practice, New York, Peter Lang, pp. 5-38;
333.Van Dijk, Teun A., (2004b), From Text Grammar to Critical Discourse Analysis A
brief autobiography, document electronic, accesat n data de 7 iunie 2012,
http://www.discourses.org/From%20text%20grammar%20to%20critical%20discourse%20an
alysis.html;
334.Van Dijk, Teun A., (2007), Lecture First International Conference on Discourse and
Intercultural Relations, University of Murcia, September 2004, n Scheu Lottgen, U. Dagmar
i Snchez, Jos Saura (coord.), Discourse and International Relations. Bern,Lang, pp. 3-26;
335.Van Dijk, Teun A., (2008a), Editors Introduction: The Study of Discourse: An
Introduction, n van Dijk, Teun A. (coord.), Discourse Studies, vol. I, Londra, Sage, pp. xix-
xlii;
336.Van Dijk, Teun A., (2008b), Discourse and Power, Basingstoke i New York, Palgrave
Macmillan;
337.Van Dijk, Teun A. i Kintsch, Walter, (1983), Strategies of Discourse Comprehension,
New York, Academic Press;
338.Van Eemeren, Frans H., (2010), Strategic Maneuvering in Argumentative Discourse.
Extending the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation, Amsterdam, John Benjamins;
339.Van Eemeren, Frans H. i Grootendorst Rob, (2004), A Systematic Theory of
Argumentation. The Pragma-Dialectical Approach. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press;
340.Voltmer, Katrin i Schmitt-Beck, Rdiger, (2006) New Democracies without Citizens?
Mass media and democratic orientations - a four-country comparison n Voltmer, Katrin
(coord.), Mass Media and Political Communication in New Democracies, Londra i New
York, Routledge, pp. 199-214;
341.Voltmer, Katrin, (2006) The mass media and the dynamics of political communication
in processes of democratization: An introduction, n Voltmer, Katrin (coord.), Mass Media
and Political Communication in New Democracies, Londra i New York, Routledge, pp. 1-16;
342.Walkosz, Barbara J., (2003), Issue Advocacy and Political Advertising in Election
2000, n Kaid, Lynda Lee; Tedesco, John C.; Bystrom, Dianne G. i McKinney, Mitchell S.
(coord.) The Millennium Election Communication in the 2000 Campaign, Lanham, Rowman
& Littlefield Publishers, pp. 27-41;
343.Walton, Douglas, N., (1992), Plausible Argument in Everyday Conversation, New
York., State University of New York Press;
344.Walton, Douglas, N., (1995), A Pragmatic Theory of Fallacy Studies in Rhetoric and
Communication, Alabama, The University of Alabama Press;
345.Weber, Max, (1978), Economy and Society, An Outline of Interpretive Sociology. editat
de Roth, Guenther i Wittich, Claus, Berkley, University of California Press;
346.Weber, Max, (2009), Politics as a Vocation n Gerth, H.H. i Mills, Wright C., From
Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, Abingdon, Routledge, pp. 77- 128;
347.Weedon, Chris, (2004), Identity and Culture: Narratives of differences and belonging,
Berkshire, Open University Press;
53
348.Wheeler, Mark, (2012), The Democratic Worth of Celebrity Politics in an Era of Late
Modernity, n The British Journal of Politics & International Relations, vol. 14 (3), pp. 407
422;
349.Wilson, John, (2003), Political Discourse, n Schiffrin, Deborah; Tannen, Deborah i
Hamilton, Heidi E. (eds.), Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Malden, Blackwell Publishing, pp.
398 415;
350.Wittgenstein, Ludwig, (2001), Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, Bucureti, Humanitas;
351.Wittgenstein, Ludwig, (2013a), Cercetri filosofice, Ediia a II a, Bucureti, Humanitas;
352.Wittgenstein, Ludwig, (2013b), Caietul albastru, Bucureti, Humanitas;
353.Wood, Linda A. i Kroger, Rolf O., (2000) Doing Discourse Analysis: Methods for
Studying Action in Talk and Text, Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications;
354.Wolton, Dominique, (1995), La communication politique. Entre limpens les a priori
et les typologies, n Hrmes, nr.17- 18, pp. 9-13;
355.Yawn, Mike i Beatty, Bob, (2000), Debate-induced Opinion Change: What Matters?,
n American Politics Quarterly, vol. 28, pp. 27085;
356.Zamfir, Ctlin, (2004), O analiz critic a tranziiei. Ce va fi dup, Iai, Polirom;
357.Zamfir, Ctlin, (2012), Ce fel de tranziie vrem. Analiza critic a tranziie II, - Raportul
social al ICCV nr. 5/ 2012, disponibil online la adresa:
http://www.acad.ro/bdar/rapInt2011/11eco/RaportICCV5-2012.pdf, accesat n mai-iunie 2014;
358.Zeca-Buzura, Daniela, (2015), La taclale cu idolii. Talk show-ul - dispozitiv strategic i
simbolic al neoteleviziunii, Iai, Polirom;
359.Zarefsky, David, (2009), Strategic maneuvering in political argumentation, n van
Eemeren, Frans H. (coord.), Examining argumentation in context: Fifteen studies on strategic
maneuvering, Amsterdam, John Benjamins, pp. 115 -130.
Resurse electronice:
1. ***, http://www.editura-aleg.ro/module-pagesetter-printpub-tid-1-pid-68.phtml, accesat n
14.04.2013
2. ***, http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/presidential-candidates-former-prime-
minister-milos-zeman-news-photo/160040295, accesat n data de 14.05.2014;
3. ***,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Czech_presidential_election,_2013#Candidates,
accesat n data de 14.05.2014;
4. Adevrul, (10.12.2004), TVR 1 a fost lider de audien cu Destinaia Cotroceni,
2004,http://adevarul.ro/cultura/istorie/tvr-1-fost-lider-audienta-cu-destinatia-cotroceni-
1_50ba06dd7c42d5a663b0b246/index.html, accesat n data de 18.05.2015;
5. Alegerile prezideniale din 2004, surs electronic: http://www.agerpres.ro/flux-
documentare/2014/10/03/alegerile-prezidentiale-din-2004-11-39-29, accesat n data de:
18.05.2015;
6. Alegerile prezideniale din 2009, doc. electronic: http://www.agerpres.ro/flux-
documentare/2014/10/03/alegerile-prezidentiale-din-2009-11-47-25, accesat n data de
18.12.2015;
7. Anul 2004 alegeri n Romnia, doc. electronic: http://infopolitic.ro/studii/anul-2004-
alegeri-in-romania.html, accesat n data de 18.05.2015;
54
8. Asociaia Pro Democraia, 2005, Alegeri la limita democraiei. Analiza procesului
electoral din Romnia, octombrie decembrie 2004, Bucureti,
http://www.apd.ro/files/publicatii/Alegeri%20Generale%202004%2020Raport%20APD%20-
%20Fara%20Anexe.pdf, accesat n data de 18.05.2015;
9. Asociaia Pro Democraia, 2010, Prezideniale 2009 - Raport de observare a alegerilor
pentru Preedintele Romniei din 2009, Bucureti, http://www.apd.ro/wp-
content/uploads/2015/11/Raport_Prezidentiale_2009.pdf, accesat n data de 18.12.2015;
10. Autoritatea Electoral Permanent, Cartea alb a alegerilor parlamentare i prezideniale
2004, p. 29, doc. electronic: http://www.roaep.ro/legislatie/wp-
content/uploads/2015/06/cartea_alba_alegeri_2004.pdf, accesat n data de 18.05.2015;
11. Badea, Camelia (15.11.2014), Alegeri prezideniale 2014: Klaus Iohannis - Cine l
susine, doc. electronic: http://www.ziare.com/klaus-johannis/candidat-alegeri-prezidentiale-
2014/alegeri-prezidentiale-2014-klaus-iohannis-cine-il-sustine-1332444, accesat n data de
14.08.2015;
12. Badea, Camelia (15.11.2014), Alegeri prezideniale 2014: Victor Ponta - Cine l susine,
doc. electronic: http://www.ziare.com/victor-ponta/candidat-alegeri-prezidentiale-
2014/alegeri-prezidentiale-2014-victor-ponta-cine-il-sustine-1332396, accesat n data de
14.08.2015;
13. BBC, (21.03.2015) Election debates agreement reached, http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-
politics-32001383, accesat n data de 14.04.2015;
14. Biroul Electoral Central, Rezultate alegeri parlamentare 2008, surs electronic:
http://www.becparlamentare2008.ro/legislatie.html, accesat n data de 10.08.2015
15. Biroul Electoral Central, Rezultate alegeri parlamentare 2012,
http://www.becparlamentare2012.ro/rezultate%20finale.html, accesat n data de 10.08.2015;
16. Biroul Electoral Central, Rezultate alegeri prezideniale 2009,
http://www.bec2009p.ro/rezultate.html , accesat n data de 10.08.2015;
17. Biroul Electoral Central, Rezultate alegeri prezideniale 2014,
http://www.bec2014.ro/rezultate, accesat n data de 4.09.2015;
18. Biroul Electoral Central, Rezultate alegeri prezideniale i naionale 2004:
http://roaep.ro/bec_gen_04/?page_id=19, accesat n data de 18.05.2015;
19. Brileanu, Petrior, (2006), Alegeri 1996, disponibil la adresa:
http://revista22.ro/3263/.html, accesat n data de 18.05.2015;
20. Bunea, Iulia, (2014), AUDIENELE DEZBATERII. Peste 3,5 milioane de romni au
urmrit dezbaterea Iohannis - Ponta. Cei mai muli pe Realitatea TV, disponibil la:
http://www.paginademedia.ro/2014/11/audientele-dezbaterii-peste-35-milioane-de-romani-au-
urmarit-dezbaterea-iohannis-ponta-cei-mai-multi-pe-realitatea-tv, accesat n data 14.08.2015;
21. Cockerell, Michael (2010) Why 2010 will see the first TV leaders election debate,
disponibil la: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/election_2010/8612153.stm, accesat
n data de 14.04.2015;
22. Commission on Presidential Debates (Comisia Dezbaterilor Prezideniale),
http://www.debates.org/, accesat n perioada aprilie-mai 2014;
23. Consiliul Naional al Audiovizualului, Despre CNA- Scurt istoric,
http://arhiva.cna.ro/desprecna/arhiva.html, accesat n data de 15.04.2013;
24. Cristea, Irina Andreea, (3.10.2014), Alegerile prezideniale din 1992, surs electronic:
http://www.agerpres.ro/flux-documentare/2014/10/03/alegerile-prezidentiale-din-1992-11-29-
27, accesat n data de 14.08.2015;
25. Deutsche Welle, (1.09.2013), Chancellor Merkel faces SPD challenger Steinbrck in
debate, http://www.dw.de/chancellor-merkel-faces-spd-challenger-steinbr%C3%BCck-in-
debate/a-17059138, accesat n data de 14.04.2015;
55
26. INA (Institut national de l'audiovisuel), http://www.institut-national-audiovisuel.fr/,
accesat n perioada mai-iunie 2014;
27. Institutul Naional de Statistic, Statistic electoral,
http://www.insse.ro/cms/files/statistici/stat_electorale.pdf, accesat n data de 18.05.2015;
28. MAY2015, (31.03.2015) Election debates: Cameron is the clear winner as Thursdays
speaking order is announced, http://www.may2015.com/datablast/election-debates-cameron-
is-the-clear-winner-as-thursdays-speaking-order-is-announced/, accesat n data de 14.04.2015;
29. Mediafax, (20.11.2009) Campania prezidenial a fost anost, lipsit de creativitate i
emoie: http://www.mediafax.ro/main-story/campania-prezidentiala-a-fost-anosta-lipsita-de-
creativitate-si-emotie-5120739, accesat n data de 10.08.2015.
30. Nstase, Adrian, 2014, Alegerile prezidentiale din 2004 (IV), doc. electronic:
https://nastase.wordpress.com/2014/11/05/alegerile-prezidentiale-din-2004-iv/#_ftn2, accesat
n data de 18.05.2015;
31. Obae, Petrior, 2009, AUDIENE: Aproape 5 milioane de romni au urmrit Marea
Confruntare, http://www.paginademedia.ro/2009/12/audien%C8%9Be-aproape-5-milioane-
de-romani-au-urmarit-marea-confruntare, accesat n data de 10.08.2015;
32. Obae, Petrior, 2014, B1 TV, pe primul loc cu dezbaterea Victor Ponta Klaus
Iohannis, peste Pro TV. Digi 24, ntre primele posturi cu preluarea confruntrii. Ci romni au
vzut duelul: http://www.paginademedia.ro/2014/11/b1-tv-pe-primul-loc-cu-dezbaterea-
victor-ponta-klaus-iohannis-peste-pro-tv-digi-24-intre-primele-posturi-cu-preluarea-
confruntarii-cati-romani-au-vazut-duelul, accesat n data 14.08. 2015;
33. Partidul Social Democrat: http://www.psd.ro/despre/cine-suntem/istorie/, accesat n
data de 18.05.2015;
34. Preedinia Franei, http://www.elysee.fr/, accesat n perioada 15 mai 2014;
35. Radio Poland, (17.05.2015), Presidential candidates attend TV debate, ,
http://www.thenews.pl/1/9/Artykul/207107,Presidential-candidates-attend-TV-debate-, accesat n
data de 18.05.2015;
36. Sesizare Remus Cernea ctre OSCE (2009), http://remuscernea.ro/2009/11/plangere-la-
misiunea-osce-in-romania, accesat n data de 15.04.2013
37. tiri TVR (09.11.2014), Mesajul PDG al TVR: "Spaiul public are nevoie de dezbaterea
dintre Victor Ponta i Klaus Iohannis", http://stiri.tvr.ro/mesajul-pdg-al-tvr-spatiul-public-are-
nevoie-de-dezbatarea-dintre-victor-ponta-si-klaus-iohannis_52504.html, accesat n data de
14.04.2015)
38. The Guardian, (16.04.2015) David Cameron's 'not invited' line draws fire from party
leaders, http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/16/leaders-debate-cameron-not-
invited-criticism, accesat n data de 18.04.2015;
39. The Telegraph, (11.01.2013) Czechs head to polls for first ever direct presidential
election, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/czechrepublic/9794983/Czechs-head-
to-polls-for-first-ever-direct-presidential-election.html, accesat n data de 12.05.2014.
Resurse video:
1. Agenia AmosNews, (16.07. 2014), "TURNEUL CANDIDATILOR" - 1996. Dezbaterea
Ion Iliescu - Emil Constantinescu, [fiier video] accesat de la adresa:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPuyTrvldac, n data de 04.10.2014;
2. Arhiva SRTV: casetele 54701, 54792, 29501, 96250, 96259, 96260, 96261 vizionate n
perioada decembrie 2012 februarie 2013;
56
3. DeCeBasescu.ro, (26.11.2009a), Dezbatere Traian Basescu Crin Antonescu,- 5 pri,
[fiier video], accesat de la adresa: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLDD34A45DFD6305EC, n
data de 15.10.2012;
4. DeCeBasescu.ro, (27.11.2009b), Marea dezbatere: Traian Basescu vs Mircea Geoana vs
Crin Antonescu- 15 pri, [fiier video] Accesat de la adresa:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLB48BE7F65A45872D, n data de 15.10.2012;
5. TVR Plus, (16.11.2014), Preedinte pentru Romnia, 5 ediii, [fiiere
video] http://www.tvrplus.ro/emisiune-presedinte-pentru-romania-8130, accesate la adresa:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLB48BE7F65A45872D, n data de 14.04.2015;
6. tirile TVR 1, Ediie Special, (28.01. 2014), 24 de ani de la momentul 28-29 ianuarie
1990. Manifestaia Opoziiei i mineriada, [fiier video] Accesat de la adresa:
http://stiri.tvr.ro/editie-speciala-24-de-ani-de-la-momentul-28-29-ianuarie-1990-manifestatia-
opozitiei-si-mineriada_39728_video.html#view, n data de 14.04.2015;
Resurse pres naional (format tiprit):
1. ***, (1996, 14 noiembrie), Astzi la TVR, n Adevrul, Nr. 2024, p. 1;
2. Buletinul de Informare Public al Comisiei Naionale pentru Statistic, (1990),
Rezultatele definitive ale alegerilor din 20 mai 1990, n nr. 5/1990, p. 1;
3. Cmpeanu, Paul (1996, 7 noiembrie), Dezbaterea celor 16 candidai la preedinie (31
oct. 1996), n Revista 22, Anul VII, nr.46, p. 10;
4. Iura, Oana, (1996, 16 noiembrie), S-au stins luminile rampei electorale, n Adevrul,
Nr. 2026, p. 2;
5. Mitroi, Rzvan, (1996, 14 noiembrie), Lupta se ncinge, n Adevrul, Nr. 2024, p. 3;
6. Moldovan, Drago, (1996, 9 - 10 noiembrie), Ion Iliescu i Emil Constantinescu vor
avea dou ntlniri la TVR, n Adevrul, Nr. 2020, p. 2;
7. Palade, Rodica (1996, 6-12 noiembrie), Prestaia TVR, n Revista 22, Anul VII, nr.45,
p. 5;
8. Pavel, Constantin, (1996, 13 noiembrie), Dou concepii distinct despre preedinie,
n Adevrul, Nr. 2023, p. 3.
Resurse legislative:
1. Comunicatul ctre ar al Consiliului F.S.N. din 22 decembrie 1989, publicat n
Monitorul Oficial nr. 1/ 22 decembrie 1989, accesat la adresa:
http://www.historia.ro/exclusiv_web/general/articol/comunicatul-c-tre-ar-al-consiliului-fsn-
22-decembrie-1989, n data de 5.10.2014;
2. Consiliul Naional al Audiovizualului, DECIZIA nr. 528 din 11.09.2014 privind regulile
de desfurare n audiovizual a campaniei electorale pentru alegerea Preedintelui Romniei,
doc. electronic: http://www.cna.ro/IMG/pdf/DECIZIE_CNA_528_2014.pdf, accesat n data
14.08. 2015;
57
3. Consiliul Naional al Audiovizualului, DECIZIA nr. 853 din 29 septembrie 2009 privind
regulile de desfurare n audiovizual a campaniei electorale pentru alegerea Preedintelui
Romniei, doc. electronic: http://www.cna.ro/IMG/pdf/Decizie_CNA_853_2009.pdf, accesat
n data de 14.08. 2015;
4. CONSTITUIA ROMNIEI, 1991, Cap II, Preedintele Romniei, Art. 80 - 84, accesat
la adresa http://www.cdep.ro/pls/dic/act_show?ida=1&idl=1&tit=3#t3c2, n data de 5.10.2014;
5. Decret lege nr. 2 din 27 decembrie 1989 privind constituirea, organizarea si
functionarea Consiliului Frontului Salvarii Nationale si a consiliilor teritoriale ale Frontului
Salvarii Nationale, publicat n Monitorul Oficial nr. 4/ 27 decembrie 1989
http://www.monitoruljuridic.ro/act/decret-lege-nr-2-din-27-decembrie-1989-privind-
constituirea-organizarea-si-functionarea-consiliului-frontului-salvarii-nationale-si-a-
consiliilor-teritoriale-ale-frontului-salvarii-nationale-emitent-20050.html, n data de 5.10.2014;
6. Decret lege nr. 8 din 31 decembrie 1989 privind nregistrarea i functionarea partidelor
politice i organizatiilor obtesti din Romania, publicat n accesat la adresa:
http://www.cdep.ro/pls/legis/legis_pck.htp_act_text?idt=11004, n data de 5.10.2014;
7. Decret lege nr. 81 din 9 februarie 1990 privind Consiliul Provizoriu de Uniune
Naional, publicat n Monitorul Oficial nr. 27/ 10 februarie 1990, accesat la adresa
http://www.monitoruljuridic.ro/act/decret-lege-nr-81-din-9-februarie-1990-privind-consiliul-
provizoriu-de-uniune-nationala-emitent-frontul-salvarii-nationale-publicat-n-20051.html, n
data de 5.10.2014;
8. Decret lege nr. 92 din 14 martie 1990 publicat n Monitorul Oficial nr. 35/18 mar.
1990, accesat la adresa http://www.cdep.ro/pls/legis/legis_pck.htp_act_text?idt=7528, n data
de 5.10.2014;
9. Hotrrea Guvernului nr. 802 din 8 august 2008, publicat n Monitorul Oficial 595/8
august 2008) (surs: http://www.becparlamentare2008.ro/legislatie.html, accesat prin
idrept.ro, n octombrie 2014;
10. Hotrrea Guvernului nr. 1259/ 2009 privind organizarea i desfurarea
referendumului naional din data de 22.11.2009, accesat prin idrept.ro, n octombrie 2014;
11. Legea nr. 68/1992 pentru alegerea Camerei Deputailor i a Senatului, publicat n
Monitorul Oficial al Romniei, Partea I, nr. 164 din 16 iulie 1992, accesat prin idrept.ro, n
octombrie 2014;
12. Legea nr. 69/ 1992 pentru alegerea Presedintelui Romaniei, publicat n Monitorul
Oficial nr. 164 din 16 iulie 1992, accesat la adresa:
http://www.cdep.ro/pls/legis/legis_pck.htp_act_text?idt=7188 n data de 5.10.2014;
13. Legea nr. 27/ 1996 Legea partidelor politice n Monitorul Oficial nr. 87 din 29 aprilie
1996, accesat la adresa: http://www.lege-online.ro/lr-LEGE-27%20-1996-(8073)-(1).html n
data de 5.10.2014;
14. Legea nr. 370/2004 pentru alegerea Preedintelui Romniei. Legea pentru alegerea
Preedintelui Romniei, republicat 2011, Republicat n Monitorul Oficial, Partea I nr. 650 din
12 septembrie 2011, accesat prin idrept.ro, n octombrie 2014.
58