Håkan Juholt och Skavlan
En uppsats om pratshowens möjligheter och begränsningar för partiledare i förtroendekris
This essay examines the appearance of Ha?kan Juholt, former party leader of the swedish social democratic party, in the norwegian/swedish talk show Skavlan, during Juholt?s crisis of confidence in the autumn of 2011. In this appearance it is clear that Juholt is badly treated by the host Fredrik Skavlan, and his guest, writer and journalist Linn Ullmann, while the audience seems to applaud and laugh at Skavlans and Ullmanns criticisms.The purpose of this essay is to investigate how, and why Juholt is treated in this way, and which rhetorical strategies Skavlan and Ullmann employ to create community between them selves and their audience. To understand this occurrence it is important to study Juholt?s rhetorical situation, and which conditions his lack of confidence creates for his appearance in Skavlan. Thus, I will perform two comparative analyses, by using cluster criticism, on one hand on how Juholt was spoken of in the media, and on the other hand on how Juholt is spoken of in his appearance in Skavlan. The goal of the first analysis is to determine how Aftonbladet are valuing Juholt, and how Aftonbladet are framing the ethos of Juholt. The goal of the second analysis is to identify how Skavlan and Ullmann are valuing Juholt, versus how Juholt is valuing himself. The purpose in doing this way is to identify a pattern, a common denominator, on how Juholt was framed in Aftonbladet and how Skavlan and Ullmann are responding to Juholt. This would show that Skavlan and Ullmann are valuing Juholt the same way as Aftonbladet did, i.e. negatively, and that their valuation are a result of Aftonbladets framing of Juholt, while Juholt is valuing himself positively.The results show a pattern in that both Aftonbladet and subsequently Skavlan and Ullmann are valuing Juholt negatively, and that both Skavlan and Ullmann are treating Juholt with suspicion and distance. First of all, the results show the persuasive effect Aftonbladet?s framing on Juholt had on Skavlan?s and Ullmann?s way in relating to Juholt. Secondly, the results show Juholt?s inability to adapt his communication to the situational constraints that surrounds both his crisis of confidence and the talk show as a medium. Thirdly, the results point to humour as an important rhetorical strategy to achieve identification and differentiation. Finally, this essay points to the talk show?s role as an admittedly important platform for consensus-building politicians, however, this requires an understanding of the rhetorical situation, and which cultural constraints that are inherent in both the audiences? expectations on talk shows as a medium, and the host?s attempt at making an entertaining programme.