Producing political rhetoric: An exploration of contemporary rhetorical practices in Flemish politics

Since the rediscovery of rhetoric in the fields of political science (Finlayson, 2004), political communication (Beasley, 2012) and political marketing (Brown et al., 2018), scholars have increasingly recognized the importance of rhetoric in political speech (Finlayson & Martin, 2008) and other types of political communication (Martin, 2014). In most of these studies rhetorical analyses, i.e. the study of rhetorical means in communication, are employed to study concepts such as ideology and strategy (Condor, Tileaga & Billig, 2013). Thereby, these studies build on the key assumption that political communication is strategic in nature (Stromback & Esser, 2017). However, recent studies on the nature of rhetoric claim that much of rhetoric might be socio-culturally determined rather than strategically devised (Turnbull, 2018). In other words, some rhetorical means (e.g. metaphors) are so deeply culturally encoded that they are often used unconsciously and non-strategically. Consequently, the key assumption of political rhetorical studies might be susceptible to some nuancing. However, it is hard to assess the extent to which political rhetoric is culturally determined, because little is known about the rhetorical production of political communication. In order to tackle this issue, the present study aims to explore the use of rhetoric by Belgian politicians and their communications managers (speechwriters, spokesmen): First, (i) the study will explore the rhetorical practices (frequency, rhetorical means) for political communication (speeches, press releases, interviews, debates). Secondly, (ii) the rhetorical competence of politicians and their communications managers will be established. Finally, (iii) the views of politicians on rhetorical strategy are examined. Therefore, a multimethod approach is adopted. First, a survey will be conducted in February with on the one hand Belgian, executive politicians (N=270; i.e. 15% of the population) through stratified sampling for location, function and political party, and on the other hand with political communications managers of the different political parties (N=150 of an estimated population of 500). Results of the survey will map the contemporary political communication practices and the perceived rhetorical labour behind these practices (i) as well as assess both the perceived and actual knowledge of rhetorical means (ii). In addition, 25 in-depth interviews will be taken between April and June (10 local politicians, 10 national politicians and 5 communications managers) in order to examine their views on strategic political communication in general and rhetoric in particular (iii). The purpose of these interviews is to unravel the reasoning and motivation behind rhetorical choices in political communication. The present study aims to compare quantitative data on contemporary rhetorical practices and competence together with qualitative insights in the rhetorical reasoning of politicians and communications managers themselves with the theoretical literature on rhetoric. Thereby, the existing assumptions on the strategic production of rhetoric are confronted with the contemporary status of rhetoric in political communication from a sender perspective. Moreover, as strategic rhetorical communication requires both motivational depth and rhetorical competence in comparison with the spontaneous use of rhetoric, the present study attempts to estimate the extent to which political rhetoric is a strategic technique or a cultural feature.