CHAPTER I

C-SPAN AND THE "UNMEDIATED" MESSAGE

"When Mcxico sends its pcople, they're not sending their best..
They're sending
pcople that havc lots of problems. And they'rc bringing thosc problems with us
(sic).
They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. Thcy're rapists and somc I
assume
arc good pcoplc"- Donald Trump

This now infamous cxcerpt from Donald Trump's Presidential

Campaign
announcementspeech was met with a mixture of shock, awe, and disbelief by citizens
across thc United States. Although populist movements and
extremist leaders
exploiting racial and ethnic tensions to garner votes is no brainchild of the 21*
century, it was extremely disorienting to witness an almost household celebrity and
presidential candidate hopeful,. kickstart what many assumed would be a failed
attempt at nomination, with such controversial comments. While many assumed such
bigoted and misleading discourse would wither at democracy's door, 2016 proved
otherwise, as we witnessed the emergence of a political sphere governed not by the
'uncomfortable truth' but by the ever-comforting caress of post-truth.
The primary material examined here is a transcribed copy of Donald Trump's
full presidential campaign announcement speech that is available on YouTube titled.
"Donald Trump Presidential Campaign Announcement Full Speech (C-SPAN)'" and
published bythe YouTube channel of American network C-SPAN on June 16th, 2015.
This video posted on YouTube is a recording of the livestream that was broadcast
through C-SPANS T.V channel on June 16" from Trump Tower. The video is forty
seven minutes and eight seconds long. This will be athorough analysis of both the
message and medium. If post-truth is characteriscd by what Lee Mclntyre states as a
"'subscription to an ideological supremacy of aligning to an unscientific and non
factualworldvicw by certain groups of people with nothing but the bleak promise of a
community unitcd in its hatred for the 'other", then our analysis will investigate the
spcech thoroughly to find evidence of such (13). Further investigation willalso be
donc on the medium through which the spcech was broadcasted tomillions in
America and across the world.
 AN OVERVIEW OF THE PRESIDENTLAL CAMPAIGN ANNOUNCEMENT
SPEECH

The announcement speech delivered by Donald Trump on June the 16 was

one that Caleb Huffman would call 'A Secular Prosperity Gospel.'Huffman goes on to
comment how the themes of the speech was not unique but typical, for it followed the
followed the four goals of apresidential announcement speech at outlined by Trent
and Frnedenberg (20O8): Announcing their candidacy. discouraging other potential
cand1dates, informing their reasons for running for president and outline the core
stances of their campaign (Huftman 4). Yet in order to equate Trump to the preacher
man, Hoftman sees in him the traces of persuasive oratory that can evoke affective
response from an audience unsatisfied with the present state of aftairs.

Trump in hisspeech touched on several issues, a few of which understandably

left the media in a frenzy. He identified both the international as well as domestic
iSsues faced by the nation. His stance on immigration was the one that stoked the most
controversy ue to his reference to Mexicans as rapists, bringing with them drugs and
cnme' (Donald Trump Presidential Campaign Announcement Full Speech (C-SPAN)
00:03:38). It was also related to the issue of immigration that he mentioned the idea of
building a huge wall on the border with Mexico, for which he also assured that crowd
that he would make Mexico pay. He is unrelenting on his stance on terrorism which
he bashed while roping in the entire middle cast into thc conversation. He states how
he is the only one that could solve the ISIS problem. His stance on Irag was bold and
critical of Fomer president George Bush. a position the other GOP candidates were
hesitant to take due to Jeb Bush occupying the top polls during that time.
Donald Trump had no qualms in mentioning his enormous wealth and
tinancial independence which ascertained power over the lobbyists of Washington.
The economy was in shambles according to him, with the real unemployment
numbers being almost I8 to 20 percent. Americas enemies are getting stronger by the
day and the country being in the hands of weak men and losers who knows not what
they do, says Trump. the messiah of the American man. He would be the one to put
Japan and China in their rightful place, which according to him is rightfully below
America in the hierarchy. Trump and his army of the world's best negotiators alone
are equipped for this task. Therefore, a recurring motif we notice in this address is the
 duality of Donald Tnump. He is one who has beat the system but one who now wants
to fix this very same system that carned him his wealth. He is contradiction
embodied.
the millionaire 's heir, who would now represent the coal
workers son. And yet despite
every contrary opinion and against all ridicule, Donald Trump emerged
victorious,
which I will arguc should not be surprising in hindsight. Trump catered to the
new age
of voters. He catered tothe 'expressive voter', a political entity
although present
before the Trump campaign, harnessed and made ever so prominent through his
politics.

AN UNTETHERED ORATION

Trump. in the aftermath of his presidential candidacy announcement and much

of his campaign was not received with the same level of seriousncss by political
pundits, traditional news mcdiaor even the clectorate, as the other GOP candidates.
His background in reality television and as a celebrity was seen by many as an
undignificd lincage that would sully the most esteemed office. Yet his experience in
entertainment, solidificd by his mastery over the spectacle and advantage as a
performer. ensurcd that he would evoke a much more visceral and affective response
from the crowd than any other candidate. Donald Trump is not the first celebrity
politician to transfer one 's skills from the world of showbusiness to politics for we are
familiar with Ronald Reagans time in Hollywood before his tenure as president. Yet
what would make Donald Trump's rhetoric potent and uncomfortably unfamiliar to
the political rhetoric of the past, is the thematic and formal characteristics of his
speech that is laden with post-truth rhetoric.

To start with, the very definition of post-truth states that it refers to

circumstances whcre facts arc less influential in shaping public opinion. If we look at
all the factual inaccuracies that outlined Trump'sannouncement speech we find a
plethora, which signify an alarmingly indifferent attitude towards factual accuracy.
Brooks Jackson in an article titled Trump Tramples Facts, published on FactCheck.org
has highlighted some of the predominantly false or misleading statements made by
Trump in his speech in New York (Brooks 2015).

I. Trump's claim that GDP has never been below zero until last quarter's drop is
false. It has dipped 42 times below zero since 1946.

17
 2. The 54 million job openings recorded at the end of April 2015.,
contradict
Trump's declaration of none. This has been the most job openings
recorded
since the Bureau of Labour Statistics started tracking jobs
since 2000,
3. He is unable to back his declaration of the real
unemployment being rates
anywhere from 18 to 20 percent with any solid data. Trump also misquotes the
actualunemployment rate which is 5.5 percent with his addition of a 0.1
percent to make it 5.6 percent.
4. In his hypothetical account of blocking anyplans made by Ford to
take jobs
out of the country, he neglected to state how only the congress had the power
to imposetaxes, and how the imposition of such taxes would violate the North
American Free Trade Agreement. It was stated by Sean McAlinden, chief
cconomist and executive vice president for the Centre for Automotive
Research that Trump's proposal may also violate WTO agreements signed by
the United States that do not allow an increase in tariff once it has
been
lowered. While it is not out of bounds for Trump to sign the legislation into
law after Congress votes to revoke NAFTA, this was an unacceptable
omission
of crucial information.

5. Trump's claim that the five Taliban leaders who had been freed in exchange
for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, were back on the battlefield was misleading for they
were still under U.S monitoring in Qatar and subjected to a travel ban. The
state department has vehemently contested the claim that any of them had re
joined their terrorist cells.
6. Trump's bashing of the 39 to 55 percent rate increases in health care premium
was something that in reality had been merely the proposed rates and had not
met with the necessary regulatory approval.

Anastasia Deligiaouri in her article on the discursive construction of truth,

provides us four forms of post-truth narratives. The first include
statements/information that deliberately and by purpose come into contradiction with
truth (Trump's statements on the GDP, job availability and unemployment rates are
examples of this first category). The second form include statements/ information that
are not casy to verify in terms of their coespondence with the truth (Trump's
misleading statements about the released Taliban leaders would have been extremely
difficult for the public to verify if not informed by the state department), The third
form is the concealment of scveral facets of
an event. especially of thOse that are
crucial to its understanding (the perfect example of is
this how Trump concealed the
fact that even as president, he could not sign a
tax legislation into law unless first
approved by congress). The final form of post-truth
narrative is the presentation of
events/facts for the purpose of producing political statements that appeal to the public
or a segment of the public without
being checked for
their validity lapplicability
(Trump's comments on healthcare presented the image of a
failing system and he
engaged in manipulation of details by extrapolating
specific instances to a general
populace) (Deligiaouri 310).
What did trump engage in here? Was it outright lving? Was it
or truth? Was it the conscious
manipulation of fact
omission aspects of the truth that did not align with
of
the worldview he wanted to propagate that day?
Trump's wanton disregard to ground
his statements in fact reflects the desire to
manipulate reality and to pedal a
frightening narrative, one of an exploited America, given the bad end of the stick in
international trade, a haven for illegal immigrants and a target for ISIS. To
understand
how Trump achieves this we must first grasp what the
discursive construction of
truth as proposed by Deligiaouri is. In her article, she talks about how in
discourse
theory, the truth as 'a discourse' is the outcome of a discursive
articulation, where it is
one dominant discourse that accrues from social
antagonisms. It is the most 'powerful
discourse that manages to hegemonize 'truth'. In this social construction of truth
(which is differentiated from scientific truth by the absence of scientific
evidence), the
presence of facts is undisputed, for facts are events of the empirical world whose
presence cannot be disputed (Deligiaouri 303). Yet it is in the interpretation of fact
where social truth starts to show signs of slippage.

It is important to consider what she refers to in the discourse theory of Laclau and
Mouffe as the dominion of a discourse of truth through hegemonic intervention by
those in power. This implies that whatever is presumed to be true automatically
dominates thought and averts the mind from looking for evidence (Deligiaouri 304).
This is what we see as an objcctive of Trump's speech. To subscribe to the dominant
conscrvative discourse on issues such as terrorism, immigration, and cconomy to then
initiate thc workings of cognitivc bias amongst his audience. Cognitive bias is often
citcd as an cnabling factor for post-truth narratives by many scholars including Lee
Mclntyre. In his work he mentions how cognitive bias which has several

19
 subcategories such as the backfire effect and Dunning-Kruger effect is rooted in the
concept of motivated reasoning. Motivated reasoning is the idea that
be true may colour our perception of what is what we hope to
actually true. Mclntyre observes how we
are motivated to find a
non-ego-threatening way to reduce any psychic discomtort we
feel. This can lead to the irrational tendency to
accommodate our belicfs to our
feclings, rather than the other way around. Thus. the idea of
cognitive bias is related to
motivated reasoning in that it is customarily when we are motivated to defend the
idea
that onc of our beliefs is right that we look for
evidence to confirm it (McIntyre
44,45).

This study has thus far examined how Trump uses the idea of
truth as a discursive
construct to appeal his truth (one based on fear and 'othering')) to allow for the
motivated reasoning of his listeners to take over. His truth did not often coincide with
reality, but it did not matter as long as there was a 'truthiness' to what he said, as
long
as what he said, felt right and 'felt like the truth. It is
interesting to note that the
battle against the hegemony of Objective truth has long been the rallying cry of the
academic and even the political left. We have seen how postmodernism championed
the rise of petite recites over grand narratives as the very notion of
truth itself was put
under scrutiny. If there is no right answer in the postmodern approach and only
perspectives, then the acceptance of one amounts to a form of fascism (McIntyre 125,
126). Even Foucault talks about how truth and power are mutually dependent on
cach
other, for without truth there is no power (qtd. in Hyvonen 34). Therefore, we have to
realize that the convenient manipulation, omission, and blatant misinformation
exercised in Trump's speech is no innocent by- product of conventional political
rhetoric but a post-truth narrative, dangerous as it subscribes to a mode of power
called Ontopower.

Brian Massumi, in his book titled Ontopower: Wars, Powers and the State of
Perception, defines Ontopower as a mode of power that operates over populations
through an affcctive logic. As Massumi states, its strength resides in "conceptual
persuasion". The perceptions of the public are continually tempered through a logic of
pre-cmption by projccting a perpctually imminent threat. The threats "felt" reality
demands/ justifics pre-cmption. It draws power by drawing attention to potential
thrcats that present themsclves to feeling and thus perpetuates a constant culture of
insecurity among the masses. This what we observe in Trump bashing the current
20
 government under President Obama for not being able to look out for Americas best
interests America is under constant threat of being bested by their global competitors
both cconomically and militarily. By subscribing to this mode of power called
Ontopower he is able to perpetuate this culture of insecurity by spewing seeds of
hatred against the perceived thrcat of the other. One major threat he perceives is that
of illegal immigration for which he proposes the building of the wallon the
Mexican
border.

What Trump is doing is appealing to emotion. Zuurbier and Fleet talk about how
"the success of the resurgence of extreme right ideology lies in their useof
affect not
only to rally support but to construct and maintain a fully functioning logical
apparatus that operates through affect. They are using affect to perform the action on
the logic of logic by offering an alternate perception whose intensity
supersedes
established facts, truths, and realities at a primary level. The far-right are weaponiz1ng
affect and post-truth to them is about the ontological reterritorialization through the
administration of affect" (Zuurbier and Fleet 474). Aclear example of how the Trump
campaign has engaged in the establishment of affective fact can be understood if we
look at their narrative on illegal immigration, especially on the southern border.
Zuurbier and Fleet mention's a few steps for the establishment of affective fact. "Any
false claim is that is not completely dismissed is treated as though it has been verified"
(480). This is the case when he initially states the enormous problem of illegal
immigration on the U.S Mexican border. Since no one can deny the existence of this
real issue, Trump is allowed the flexibility of exaggeration.

The second step according to Zuurbier and Fleet is "the enhancement of the
resonance and plausibility of the false claim through reception and insistence so that it
eventually begins to gain traction" (480), The stories of hardworking Americans
losing their jobs to illegal immigrants is pushed again and again. The third step in the
process is when, "the now somewhat believable false claim, is pushed to the absolute
limit of verification, just before it faces enough resistance to risk affective revesal and
the most scemingly preposterous conclusions are extrapolated from the now
established affective fact" (480). This is where we see Trump's narrative about
Mexicans being rapists and bringing crime with them start gaining an affective
legitimacy from his base. Zuurbier and Fleet warns that at this stage "whatever
inferences resonate to the extent that they are not totally discounted are picked up on

21
 and the proccss begins ancw"
(480). This leads to the inherent biases and
against the
cthnically different to emerge as similarly established affectiveprejudice
facts that
rouses up the voter base. Zuurbier ends by
stating that what was once
truth and the new affective reality understood as
grows" (Zuurbier and Fleet 480). The very
problem of illegal immigration has taken a life of real
its own and
invasion of American Soil. Therefore. riddled grown the likeness of
a Mexican to
with such affective facts, and
catering to the cognitive biases of an
truth age is innocent. The
expressive voter base, no rhetoric in the post
insidiousness the phenomenon of post-truth leaving the
of
confines of academic papers and
discussions and
consequences affecting the lives of millions of realinfiltrating
pecople.
politics has devastating
THE FAMILIAR
MEDIUM AND RULES OF
ENGAGEMENT
This study has thus far engaged in the
analysis of the rhetoric of Donald Trump
and seen why and how it seems both
familiar and suspiciously unfamiliar at the same
time. It willnow cxplore the medium
which brought the infamous speech to
evcryone's doors. *When citizens are truly informed, a
republic thrives. Get informed
straight from the source on C-SPAN.
Unfiltered., unbiased., word for word. From the
nation's capital to wherever you are. For the opinion that
matters the most is your
own. This is what Democracy looks like'
(C-SPAN- Powered byCable 0:09-0:30).
This soundbite from C-SPANS
promotional video on their YouTube homepage
captures the cthos of the organization.
Cable-Satellite Public Affairs Network (C-SPAN) is an American cable and
satellite television network created in 1979 by the cable
television industry as a non
profit public service. Avisit toC-SPAN.org allows us an insight into its
history and
mission. They provide what they call a gavel-t0-gavel coverage of the
workings of the
U.S Congress, both the House and Senate, without editing,
commentary, or analysis. It
is unique in the way it stresses on its indubitably unbiased nature, for its
website
boasts that underpinning this impartial, balanced coverage is the fact that no
government or taxpayer dollars support C-SPAN. In 1986, the U.S. Senate voted to
televise its debates, and C-SPAN launched a second channel, C-SPAN 2. In 2011. C
SPAN 3 was launched to provide access to additional public affairs events (C-SPAN.
Our History 2023).

22
 The main aim of my analysis of C-SPAN is to understand the public perception
of the network. For that reascon, I will now list out what is
stressed in a few key
mission points C-SPAN declares on their official website (C-SPAN Our Mission
2023):

1. C-SPAN stresses on the unedited, commentary free, balanced presentation of

the procecdings of the U.S House of representative and the US Senate and
other forums where public policy is discussed.
2. Toprovide clected and appointed officials and others who would influence
publicpolicy a direct conduit to the audience without filtering or otherwise
distorting their points of view.
3. To provide for the audience the call-in program, direct access to elected
officials, other decision makers and journalists on a frequent and open basis.
4. To employ production values that accurately convey the business of
government rather than distract from it.

The takcaway from this mission statement is the perception of an unbiased

medium that does nothing but accurately capture reality for broadcasting. An average
of 25-35 million viewers reflects a nationwide consensus on its reliability. The stress
on the uncdited nature of their broadcasts is an assertion of authenticity. Authenticity
is an attribute not many networks or shows can claim due to the heavily produced
nature of modern-day television media. The moment commentary or analysis creeps
in, subjective perception the reality it tries to accurately capture and relay. This is
where C-SPAN has an edge over the other networks that covered Trump's
announcement speech on Junc 16, 2015. Viewers on C-SPAN were allowed the
uninterrupted access to the campaign announcement without distraction, addition or
subtraction. Nicole Hemmer at NBC recounts how C-SPAN was the product of a time
when the American Public was left recling from the shocking revelations of the
decade. From news about government secrecy- lies about the Victnam war, the
Watergate cover up and its aftermath, revelations of decades of secret CIA plots and
Cxperiments- shattered trust in the federal government (Hemmer 2019). Thus, there
was callfor more transparency from the government. C-SPAN epitomizes this
transparency through its form It is less the content and more how the content is
delivered that inspired confidence in the network amongst the American people.

23
 Therefore, the fundamental principle that underlies audience response to C
SPAN is this. It brings the procecdings, and messages of their elected
representatives
and policy makers to their TV screcns. The audience is then
expected to analyse the
happenings critically to decide if their epresentatives are acting in their best interest
and protest if the contrary is detected. Thus, broadcasting on
C-SPAN is meant for
critique and delivered in a fomat that expects an audience disposed towards critical
receptivity. One could even muse that the format is as unabashedly representative of
"the real' as close circuit cameras used for
surveillance. It is meant to engage its
audicnce rationally, and its goal is the production of a more informed public. It is
almost so non-intrusive that it captures what McLuhan expects ofa
mediums as
extensions of our consciousness. Therefore, a tvpical C-SPAN audience trusting the
authentic nature of the source is critically receptive to the messages they
hear. The
medium is almost invisible. And the role of the audience for this medium is pre
ordained- that of a citizen waiting to beinformed and waiting to hold to account.
This is not to say that manipulation was not possible, Hemmer notes. Georgian
representative Newt Gingrich was quick to figure out that the cameras static view of
the speaker'spodium meant that the audience at home could not verify the presence of
anyone else in the chamber. He engaged in stunts such as rendering fiery orations after
members had left for the day, challenging the non-existent opposition to defend their
views, only to be met with silence. The Democrats were painted as cowards unable to
fend off Gingrich's attacks, when in truth they were not even present. This led the
congressional leadership to quickly modify the rules and allowed the camera to pan
the chamber (Hemmer 2019). The possibility of manipulation does not render the
argument of the study null, as it merely states the obvious. No aspect of a human made
media can be one hundred percent unbiased. Things are not black or white, but often
occupy the liminal zone in between. Itis in comparison with the networks hosting the
Late-Night shows,where we observe C-SPAN occupying a region furthest away from
them on the spectrum of mediation. C-SPAN isas good as the American public gets
when it comes to almost unfiltered and uncedited content in the current media
cnvironment.

The aftermath of the spcech saw the Trump campaign being subjected to
intense backlash for the racist, xenophobic, and misinformed comments made. We
saw how FactCheck.org published an article on its website titled "Trump Tramples
24
 Facts" highlighting every single factual inaccuracy in his announcement. News media
werc not kind in theirresponse as prominent papers including the
Washington Time
and the Guardian bashed Trump and predicted an carly demise to a
campaign rooted in
violent rhetoric. The Daily News ran a front page titled '"Clown Runs for Prez". The
New York Times and The Trentonian highlighted Trump's boisterous references to his
personal wealth. The Boston Heralds front Dage tried to ask what about Trump made
the GOP nervous. Twitter, and other social networking sites overflowed with
responses (mostly negative) to the controversial announcement.

All these responses and many more point in one direction. Trump was held
accountable for his rhetoric. There was little question of any manipulation of the
message due to the history and ethos of the network under analysis. What the audience
received was the 'real' Donald Trump, with litle question of formal interference.Thus
the `almost unmediated' access to Trump invited a critical focus to fall on his
message. The audience are disposedto critical reception as they are familiar with the
rules of engaging with a C-SPAN broadcast and Trump's message could not hide
behind any stage show nor script. This was how the medium allows for critical
receptivity, shaping critical response. The stark contrast in critical reception will be
explicit when we venture into the realm of politainment in the coming chapter. There,
therules of engagement confound audience who know not whether to engage with the
content as entertainment or with a gravity one reserves for politicalcommunication.

25