This is what it takes to talk to Republicans acording to what Fox news buys to get their audience to react, words that trigger the emotion. To them it is all about gaining a strong fire of emotion and protecting it to keeping it going. Use of language. Luntz frequently tests word and phrase choices using focus groups and interviews. His stated purpose in this is the goal of causing audiences to react based on emotion. 80 percent of our life is emotion, and only 20 percent is intellect. I am much more interested in how you feel than how you think. If I respond to you quietly, the viewer at home is going to have a different reaction than if I respond to you with emotion and with passion and I wave my arms around. Somebody like this is an intellectual; somebody like this is a freak.[3] In an article in The New Yorker Luntz is quoted as saying, The way my words are created is by taking the words of others.... Ive moderated an average of a hundred plus focus groups a year over five years... I show them language that Ive created. Then I leave a line for them to create language for me.[8] In a January 9, 2007, interview on Fresh Air with Terry Gross, Luntz redefined the term Orwellian in a positive sense, saying that if one reads Orwells Essay On Language (presumably referring to Politics and the English Language), To be Orwellian is to speak with absolute clarity, to be succinct, to explain what the event is, to talk about what triggers something happening… and to do so without any pejorative whatsoever.[9] Luntzs description of Orwellian is considered to contradict both its popularly defined meaning as well as that defined by George Orwell. Luntz believes that Orwell would not have approved of many of the uses to which his pseudonym is applied by quoting Orwells essay Politics and the English Language, where Luntz focuses on how Orwell derides the use of cliché and dying metaphors.[citation needed] Luntzs description of his job revolves around exploiting the emotional content of language. Its all emotion. But theres nothing wrong with emotion. When we are in love, we are not rational; we are emotional. ...my job is to look for the words that trigger the emotion. We know that words and emotion together are the most powerful force known to mankind..[3] Additionally in his January 9, 2007, interview on Fresh Air, Luntz discussed his use of the term, energy exploration (oil drilling). His research on the matter involved showing people a picture of current oil drilling and asking if in the picture it looks like exploration or drilling. He said that 90 percent of the people he spoke to said it looked like exploring. Therefore Id argue that it is a more appropriate way to communicate. He went on to say if the public says after looking at the pictures, that doesnt look like my definition of drilling—it looks like my definition of exploring—then dont you think we should be calling it what people see it to be, rather than adding a political aspect to it all? Terry Gross responded: Should we be calling it what it actually is, as opposed to what somebody thinks it might be? The difference between exploration and actually getting out the oil—theyre two different things, arent they?[9] James L. Martin, chairman of the conservative 60 Plus Association, described Luntzs role as being that of pollster and popularizer of the phrase death tax. Martin gained an important ally in GOP pollster Frank Luntz, whose polling revealed that death tax sparked voter resentment in a way that inheritance tax and estate tax couldnt match. After all, who wouldnt be opposed to a tax on death? Luntz shared his findings with Republicans and included the phrase in the GOPs Contract with America. Luntz went so far as to recommend in a memo to GOP lawmakers that they stage press conferences at your local mortuary to dramatize the issue. I believe this backdrop will clearly resonate with your constituents, he wrote. Death is something the American people understand. Apparently, hes right. Spurred by Luntz, Republicans have employed the term death tax so aggressively that it has entered the popular lexicon. Nonpartisan venues like newspapers and magazines have begun to use it in a neutral context--a coup for abolitionists like Martin.[10]. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Luntz.
Posted on: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 13:36:54 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015