IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rfa/smcjnl/v3y2015i2p1-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Functional Analysis of 2013 Australian Member of Parliament and Prime Minister Debates

Author

Listed:
  • William L. Benoit
  • Jennifer M. Benoit-Bryan

Abstract

Kevin Rudd (Labor) engaged in two election debates in 2013: first for his seat in Parliament (Griffith) and then for Prime Minister. In seeking re-election to his Griffith seat he was challenged by Bill Glasson (Liberal), Geoff Ebbs (Green), and Karen Hunter (Palmer United). He faced Tony Abbott (Liberal) in the PM Debate. This study content analyses these two debates: an August 6, 2013 Member of Parliament debate and an August 11, 2013 Prime Minister debate. Acclaims were more common in these two debates than attacks; defenses were the least common function. Statements about policy outnumbered those on policy. In each debate, when the candidates discussed record in office (past deeds), the incumbent acclaimed more and attacked less than the challenger. More acclaims and fewer attacks addressed general goals and ideals.

Suggested Citation

  • William L. Benoit & Jennifer M. Benoit-Bryan, 2015. "A Functional Analysis of 2013 Australian Member of Parliament and Prime Minister Debates," Studies in Media and Communication, Redfame publishing, vol. 3(2), pages 1-8, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:rfa:smcjnl:v:3:y:2015:i:2:p:1-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://redfame.com/journal/index.php/smc/article/view/882/1202
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://redfame.com/journal/index.php/smc/article/view/882
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Australia; prime minister; debate; functions; topics; incumbency;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rfa:smcjnl:v:3:y:2015:i:2:p:1-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Redfame publishing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.