Challenging neutrality

Invoking extra parties in political TV-interviews

H.A. Huls, Naomi Pijnenburg

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

Abstract

The study focuses on a practice that interviewers exploit when asking questions in one-on-one political TV-interviews: they invoke extra parties. This happens when they alter the participant structure of the dyadic talk by speaking on another’s behalf, inserting a video clip that speaks for them, inviting a guest at the table to take up a position in the argument-so-far or embed a physical object with a message in their utterance. The study aims to discover patterns and actions that coincide with the various forms of invoking extra parties. It also investigates whether the exploitation of an extra party touches upon the borderline between neutrality and non-neutrality. The data collection encompasses fragments of interviews taken from the Dutch talk show Pauw & Witteman. The analysis focuses on turn-taking, repair, laughter, face-saving acts and meta-conversation. Results show that two procedures for invoking extra parties in one-on-one political interviews – inserting a video clip and embedding an object with a message – put pressure on a central value of good journalism: its neutrality.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)29-48
Number of pages20
JournalNorthern Lights: Film & Media Studies Yearbook
Volume12
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2014

Fingerprint

neutrality
Repair
video clip
interview
humor
journalism
speaking
exploitation
conversation
Neutrality
Values
Data Collection
Exploitation
Physical Objects
Talk Show
Turn-taking
Political Interview
Journalism
Laughter
Utterance

Keywords

  • interviews
  • neutrality
  • participant framework
  • adversarial questioning
  • conversation analysis
  • pragmatics

Cite this

@article{61ab2099da174d459451a21a6a7954f0,
title = "Challenging neutrality: Invoking extra parties in political TV-interviews",
abstract = "The study focuses on a practice that interviewers exploit when asking questions in one-on-one political TV-interviews: they invoke extra parties. This happens when they alter the participant structure of the dyadic talk by speaking on another’s behalf, inserting a video clip that speaks for them, inviting a guest at the table to take up a position in the argument-so-far or embed a physical object with a message in their utterance. The study aims to discover patterns and actions that coincide with the various forms of invoking extra parties. It also investigates whether the exploitation of an extra party touches upon the borderline between neutrality and non-neutrality. The data collection encompasses fragments of interviews taken from the Dutch talk show Pauw & Witteman. The analysis focuses on turn-taking, repair, laughter, face-saving acts and meta-conversation. Results show that two procedures for invoking extra parties in one-on-one political interviews – inserting a video clip and embedding an object with a message – put pressure on a central value of good journalism: its neutrality.",
keywords = "interviews , neutrality, participant framework, adversarial questioning, conversation analysis, pragmatics",
author = "H.A. Huls and Naomi Pijnenburg",
year = "2014",
month = "6",
doi = "10.1386/nl.12.1.29_1",
language = "English",
volume = "12",
pages = "29--48",
journal = "Northern Lights: Film & Media Studies Yearbook",
issn = "1601-829X",
publisher = "Intellect Publishers",
number = "1",

}

Challenging neutrality : Invoking extra parties in political TV-interviews. / Huls, H.A.; Pijnenburg, Naomi .

In: Northern Lights: Film & Media Studies Yearbook, Vol. 12, No. 1, 06.2014, p. 29-48.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Challenging neutrality

T2 - Invoking extra parties in political TV-interviews

AU - Huls, H.A.

AU - Pijnenburg, Naomi

PY - 2014/6

Y1 - 2014/6

N2 - The study focuses on a practice that interviewers exploit when asking questions in one-on-one political TV-interviews: they invoke extra parties. This happens when they alter the participant structure of the dyadic talk by speaking on another’s behalf, inserting a video clip that speaks for them, inviting a guest at the table to take up a position in the argument-so-far or embed a physical object with a message in their utterance. The study aims to discover patterns and actions that coincide with the various forms of invoking extra parties. It also investigates whether the exploitation of an extra party touches upon the borderline between neutrality and non-neutrality. The data collection encompasses fragments of interviews taken from the Dutch talk show Pauw & Witteman. The analysis focuses on turn-taking, repair, laughter, face-saving acts and meta-conversation. Results show that two procedures for invoking extra parties in one-on-one political interviews – inserting a video clip and embedding an object with a message – put pressure on a central value of good journalism: its neutrality.

AB - The study focuses on a practice that interviewers exploit when asking questions in one-on-one political TV-interviews: they invoke extra parties. This happens when they alter the participant structure of the dyadic talk by speaking on another’s behalf, inserting a video clip that speaks for them, inviting a guest at the table to take up a position in the argument-so-far or embed a physical object with a message in their utterance. The study aims to discover patterns and actions that coincide with the various forms of invoking extra parties. It also investigates whether the exploitation of an extra party touches upon the borderline between neutrality and non-neutrality. The data collection encompasses fragments of interviews taken from the Dutch talk show Pauw & Witteman. The analysis focuses on turn-taking, repair, laughter, face-saving acts and meta-conversation. Results show that two procedures for invoking extra parties in one-on-one political interviews – inserting a video clip and embedding an object with a message – put pressure on a central value of good journalism: its neutrality.

KW - interviews

KW - neutrality

KW - participant framework

KW - adversarial questioning

KW - conversation analysis

KW - pragmatics

U2 - 10.1386/nl.12.1.29_1

DO - 10.1386/nl.12.1.29_1

M3 - Article

VL - 12

SP - 29

EP - 48

JO - Northern Lights: Film & Media Studies Yearbook

JF - Northern Lights: Film & Media Studies Yearbook

SN - 1601-829X

IS - 1

ER -