The ominous utterances of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump are the subject of a recent content analysis conducted by New York Times reporters. As a former journalism professor I’m delighted to see this often undervalued research tool in the spotlight.
During my time teaching an undergraduate research methods class and I told my students how content analysis is often seen as a “simple and non-sophisticated” research method. I assured them that when it is done properly a content analysis yields solid results and strong research. This recent NY Times article nicely proves my point.
In their December 5, 2015 article Times reporters Patrick Healy and Maggie Haberman detail their methods.
“…every public utterance by Mr. Trump over the past week from rallies, speeches, interviews and news conferences to explore the leading candidate’s hold on the Republican electorate for the past five months. The transcriptions yielded 95,000 words and several powerful patterns, demonstrating how Mr. Trump has built one of the most surprising political movements in decades and, historians say, echoing the appeals of some demagogues of the past century.”
Of course if I were to grade this research project I would comment that a week is just a snapshot—not a detailed investigation and to be careful of drawing too many conclusions from the results. That said, the findings are interesting and are a harbinger of what could be a growing theme in the Trump campaign—the rhetoric of fear and personal attacks.
In its analysis of Trump’s rhetoric the Times reports,
“In another pattern, Mr. Trump tends to attack a person rather than an idea or a situation, like calling political opponents “stupid” (at least 30 times), “horrible” (14 times), “weak” (13 times) and other names, and criticizing foreign leaders, journalists and so-called anchor babies.”
The Times piece includes analysis by several academics who make some strong statements about the content and tone of Trump’s rhetoric.
“His (Trump’s) entire campaign is run like a demagogue’s — his language of division, his cult of personality, his manner of categorizing and maligning people with a broad brush,” said Jennifer Mercieca, an expert in American political discourse at Texas A&M University. “If you’re an illegal immigrant, you’re a loser. If you’re captured in war, like John McCain, you’re a loser. If you have a disability, you’re a loser…”
I’d like to see a similar content analysis done on campaign rhetoric of Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. I believe the comparisons among the candidates would be a useful tool for voters.
I’ll close with a quote from Hillary Clinton and add that although she may not have had him in mind–the statement could easily be applied to Donald Trump.
“If I want to knock a story off the front page, I just change my hairstyle.”
― Hillary Rodham Clinton