Search

In this paper I will analyze six cases of mix between politics and advertising. In the first three examples three political subjects (Zapatero, ABC, Partido Comunista Italiano) employs advertising in their political discourse in order to achieve their social and discursive ends. In the last three examples, three commercial subjects (Quilmes, Axe, M&M’s) employs politics in their commercial discourse in order to achieve their social and discursive ends. Through the analysis of these six cases, I will show that, even if reciprocal borrowings exist between these two semiotic and social domains, the relation between Politics and Advertising is not symmetrical. Actually the advertising discourse phagocytes political discourse (as many other ones), banalizing it., En este artículo analizo seis ejemplos distintos por épocas y procedencia sociocultural de mezclas entre la publicidad y la política. Tres casos en los que tres sujetos políticos (Zapatero, ABC, Partido Comunista Italiano) emplean la publicidad en sus discursos políticos para alcanzar sus fines socio-discursivos, y tres casos en los que tres sujetos comerciales (Quilmes, Axe, M&M’s) emplean la política en sus discursos publicitarios para alcanzar sus fines socio-discursivos. Mediante el análisis de estos seis casos pretendo demostrar que, aunque tengan lugar «préstamos cruzados» entre estos dos dominios semióticos y sociales, la relación entre la política y la publicidad está lejos de ser simétrica, siendo el publicitario un discurso totalizante, que fagocita el discurso político, como muchos otros, banalizándolo.

A partir de uma abordagem multidisciplinar e crítica analisa-se neste artigo, deconstruyéndolo, o significado dos termos Norte e Sul, como pode ser observado em diversos tipos de discursos (no uso comum, nos meios, e no discurso científico). A partir da observação de alguns exemplos reais, reflexionara-se sobre o feito que, em alguns casos, essas expressões não são espaciais, mas representam usos estratégicos (metafóricos e simbólicos) da linguagem, com precisas funções de manipulação, visando ocultar (alguns aspectos de) a realidade social, através do método de eufemismo. Propõem-se expressões alternativas, menos politicamente corretas, mas politicamente mais corretas, para permitir uma conscientização dos oprimidos, em vista da sua emancipação, Desde una perspectiva multidisciplinaria y crítica en este artículo se analiza, deconstruyéndolo, el significado de las expresiones Norte y Sur, tal como se las puede observar empíricamente en distintos discursos (en el lenguaje ordinario, en los medios, en el discurso científico). A partir de la observación de unos ejemplos reales, reflexionaré sobre el hecho de que en algunos casos dichas expresiones no tienen funciones espaciales, sino que representan usos estratégicos (metafóricos y simbólicos) de la lengua, con precisas funciones manipulativas, orientadas a ocultar (ciertos aspectos de) la realidad social, mediante el procedimiento del eufemismo. Propondré pues expresiones alternativas menos “políticamente correctas”, pero más correctas políticamente, por permitir una concientización de los oprimidos en vista de su emancipación., In this paper, I analyze the meaning of expressions such as North and South as they are used in different discourses (everyday language, media discourse, and scientific discourse) following a multidisciplinary, critical, and deconstructivistic approach. Starting from the observation of some real examples of linguistic usages, I will reflect about the fact that sometimes these expressions do not have spatial functions but they rather constitute strategic (symbolic and metaphorical) uses of language. Such uses are manipulative, since they are aimed at concealing (some features of) the social reality by resorting to a euphemism. I will then propose alternative expressions, less politically correct but politically fairer since they allow awareness and emancipation of oppressed people.

In this dissertation I analyze how presidentiability is discursively constructed in relation to the functioning of the Spanish contemporary political field. In particular I will analyze presidential debates as a privileged stage from which to observe the constitution, workings and representation of the political field, since they epitomize the fight between agents in changing the relations of force existing within it. Debates homologically represent the structure of the political field and its internal struggles. Since political struggle is mainly conducted with words, and debates are (or are framed as) the main communicative events of electioneering, they comprise the central space for the discursive construction of presidentiability. The analysis will show that the discourse produced by the candidates is determined by the political field structure and expresses its dynamics: in particular, it will be seen that candidates spend much of their time on the front-stage of debates to implement their electoral strategies using moves and devices designed to increase their presidentiability and decrease that of their opponent. From my multidisciplinary theoretical standpoint, I link Bourdieu’s reflections on political field and capital(s), Rhetorical and Argumentative reflections on ethos and Goffman’s reflections on image or face for the purpose of subsuming them under the label of presidentiability: i.e. the capability of being president in accordance with certain attributes. These attributes are rationally considered as necessarily inherent in the president by a large majority of people from both parties (global attributes such as ability, coherence, sincerity, selflessness, etc.) or by the large majority of people from each party (local attributes as supportiveness, dialogue, optimism, etc. in the case of the Left and toughness, strictness, etc. for the Right). My discussion on the construction of presidentiability in debates can be conceived as a triangle whose surfac

In this dissertation I analyze how presidentiability is discursively constructed in relation to the functioning of the Spanish contemporary political field. In particular I will analyze presidential debates as a privileged stage from which to observe the constitution, workings and representation of the political field, since they epitomize the fight between agents in changing the relations of force existing within it. Debates homologically represent the structure of the political field and its internal struggles. Since political struggle is mainly conducted with words, and debates are (or are framed as) the main communicative events of electioneering, they comprise the central space for the discursive construction of presidentiability. The analysis will show that the discourse produced by the candidates is determined by the political field structure and expresses its dynamics: in particular, it will be seen that candidates spend much of their time on the front-stage of debates to implement their electoral strategies using moves and devices designed to increase their presidentiability and decrease that of their opponent. From my multidisciplinary theoretical standpoint, I link Bourdieu’s reflections on political field and capital(s), Rhetorical and Argumentative reflections on ethos and Goffman’s reflections on image or face for the purpose of subsuming them under the label of presidentiability: i.e. the capability of being president in accordance with certain attributes. These attributes are rationally considered as necessarily inherent in the president by a large majority of people from both parties (global attributes such as ability, coherence, sincerity, selflessness, etc.) or by the large majority of people from each party (local attributes as supportiveness, dialogue, optimism, etc. in the case of the Left and toughness, strictness, etc. for the Right). My discussion on the construction of presidentiability in debates can be conceived as a triangle whose surfac