Press freedom vs political power: a critical analysis of linguistic impoliteness in presidential press conferences

Abstract

Linguistic impoliteness has become an increasingly prominent feature of contemporary public discourse, particularly in interactions between political leaders and journalists. However, impolite language in public discourse has received limited attention from a discourse-analytic perspective focused on the interactions between presidents and the press. In this paper, we analyse the use of linguistic impoliteness in presidential press conferences and its potential impact on press freedom. Specifically, we explore the types of impoliteness employed, their potential discursive functions, and their implications for freedom of the press. The reseach corpus consists of transcribed excerpts from four presidential press conferences held in March and April 2020, during Trump’s first presidential term, focusing on instances where Trump used impoliteness in communication with journalists. In the study, we adopt a qualitative discourse-analytic approach, drawing on Culpeper’s (2011a) and Bousfield’s (2008) theoretical frameworks to analyse the forms and functions of impoliteness, alongside Fairclough’s (1989; 1995) critical discourse approach to account for power relations within the selected discourse. The findings indicate that Trump’s use of impoliteness served multiple functions, such as evading and discouraging challenging questions, and undermining press credibility to mitigate criticism. Furthermore, the findings suggest that impoliteness can function as a mechanism for asserting authority, controlling discourse, and perpetuating power asymmetries between speakers. We therefore conclude that such use of linguistic impoliteness in presidential–press discourse may have a limiting effect on press freedom and is enabled by the power differential between presidents and journalists.