SSyyrraaccuussee UUnniivveerrssiittyy SSUURRFFAACCEE Dissertations - ALL SURFACE May 2016 CCrraaffttiinngg RRhheettoorriiccss ooff TTrruusstt:: HHiillllaarryy RRooddhhaamm CClliinnttoonn aanndd hheerr AAppppeeaallss ttoo tthhee AAmmeerriiccaann PPeeooppllee Chelsea Anne Spring Syracuse University Follow this and additional works at: https://surface.syr.edu/etd Part of the Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons RReeccoommmmeennddeedd CCiittaattiioonn Spring, Chelsea Anne, "Crafting Rhetorics of Trust: Hillary Rodham Clinton and her Appeals to the American People" (2016). Dissertations - ALL. 491. https://surface.syr.edu/etd/491 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the SURFACE at SURFACE. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations - ALL by an authorized administrator of SURFACE. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ABSTRACT This study examines Hillary Clinton’s public discourse at various points in her career, analyzing which rhetorical strategies she uses to build and maintain trust between herself and the American public. To do so, this study examines five moments in Clinton’s career in which she actively employs rhetoric that affects the public’s perception of Clinton as a trustworthy or untrustworthy figure. The five case studies analyzed in this study are Bill and Hillary Clinton’s 1992 interview on 60 Minutes, following accusations of Bill’s extramarital affair with Gennifer Flowers; Hillary Clinton’s tears in New Hampshire on the 2008 presidential campaign trail; Hillary’s “3am Phone Call” ad, released during the 2008 primary campaign; Hillary’s social media efforts to brand herself as a grandmother during the 2016 presidential campaign; and Hillary’s infamous email scandal that unfolded during the 2016 presidential campaign. With the theoretical foundation of Walter Fisher’s narrative theory, Michael McGee’s ideograph, Kenneth Burke’s identification theory, and Shawn Parry-Giles’ work in gender authenticity, this study concludes with a discussion of Clinton’s most frequently and successfully- deployed rhetorical strategies for building trust with the American people. Crafting Rhetorics of Trust: Hillary Rodham Clinton and her Appeals to the American People By: Chelsea A. Spring B.A. Purdue University 2014 M.A. Syracuse University 2016 THESIS Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Communication and Rhetorical Studies, within the College of Visual and Performing Arts Syracuse University May 2016 Copyright © Chelsea A. Spring 2016 All rights Reserved Acknowledgements With the completion of this project, much warm gratitude goes to my advisor, Dr. Amos Kiewe, for his steady guidance throughout brainstorming sessions, for clipped newspaper articles and morning discussions of new election developments, and for his calming wisdom around every bend and turn. Additional thanks go to Dr. Jennifer Stromer-Galley, for spirited discussions of her tireless campaign knowledge; to Dr. Charles Morris, for his ever-encouraging counsel to build a firm foundation; and to Dr. Rachel Hall, for her fount of knowledge on gender, image construction, and endless resources combining the two. A resounding thank you to the CRS community—to my fellow graduate students, and to the entirety of the CRS faculty and staff—for filling the past two years full to the brim with a rich and meaningful educational experience. Finally, to my family and friends, an expression of my deepest gratitude for the love and support that has carried me here, without which the clarity and doggedness required for this project would not have been possible. iv Table of Contents Chapter 1: Introduction…………………………………………………………..1 1.1 The Makings of Trust 2 1.2 The Significance of Hillary’s Road 4 1.3 Plan of Study 6 Chapter 2: The Context of Hillary Clinton ……………………………………..9 2.1 Hillary Clinton as First Lady of the United States 9 2.2 Hillary Clinton as a New York Senator 11 2.3 Hillary Clinton’s 2008 Presidential Campaign 14 2.4 Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State 19 2.5 Hillary Clinton’s 2016 Presidential Campaign 22 Chapter 3: Foundational Literature and Methodology.……………………….26 3.1 Ethos of Aristotle and Isocrates 26 3.2 Burkean Identification 28 3.3 The Narrative Paradigm 31 3.4 The Ideograph 33 3.5 Gender Authenticity 36 3.6 Methodology for Artifact Analysis 38 Chapter 4: Analyzing Hillary Clinton and her Moments of Crafting Trust....39 4.1 Hillary Rodham Clinton, no Tammy Wynette 39 4.2 Hillary’s New Hampshire Tears 47 4.3 Hillary Clinton, Answering the 3am Phone Call 56 4.4 Grandmother Clinton Goes Social 67 4.5 Wading through “Emailgate” 2016 81 Chapter 5: Discussion…………………………………………………………....93 5.1 Persuasive Appeals in Use 93 5.2 Troubles with trust 97 5.3 Dealing with Gender 99 5.4 Conclusion 102 Bibliography……………………………………………………………………..104 v 1 Chapter 1: Introduction A symbol of fierce independence and unyielding determination, champion of women’s rights and children’s advocacy, the name Hillary Rodham Clinton has been heard, reverberating through the political echo chambers and shaking the dust from the shelves of Washington for nearly 40 years. Known as a First Lady, a senator, a mother, a secretary of state, a grandmother, a Yale law school graduate, and most notably in the year 2016, a past and current presidential candidate, Clinton has built an empire on her reputation as an American political icon. Atop all of her different titles touted and offices held, Clinton now strives in 2016 to make her second run at the presidency on the name that has withstood remarkable flexibility over the course of her career as a public figure. However, throughout the flurries of polarized commentary on her government work, as well as the personal crises of her own—through the celebrations and the castigations of her decisions made on individual, state, and national levels—one question that the public continues to ask of Hillary Clinton has remained the same: Can she be trusted? This question lies at the heart of Hillary Clinton’s complicated relationship with trust building and the American public. National discussion questioning Clinton’s identity as a trustworthy presidential candidate opens a window into the world of what citizens expect from government figures, the politics of American identification, and values still held in this country about the role of gender inside and out of leadership positions. Even more fascinating though than how the public chooses to accept or deny Hillary Clinton’s personal and professional narratives, is how Clinton strategically employs various rhetorical tools to craft those narratives of why the American public should believe she can be trusted. Both proactive and reactionary attempts to convince the public that 2 they should place their faith in her as a leader at various levels of leadership have been brandished by Clinton and her collection of media teams over the years. In these relentless attempts made time and again to convince the public that she’s just as trustworthy as any man who’s ever asked for their vote, and to showcase her genuine character alongside her impressive level of expertise, Hillary Clinton communicates distinctly through a collection of rhetorics of trust. 1.1 The Makings of Trust Before examining the complex process that is a rhetorical request for trust, a definition of rhetorics of trust is needed. The premise of appearing “trustworthy” is pieced together by many inter-related qualities. Underneath the outermost layer of what makes a person trustworthy is ultimately a question of likeability: people rarely trust those who they do not like. Extending further though, in order to be likeable, public figures need to be relatable. Citizens need to know that their voices are heard and their situations are taken seriously by public figures who feel close enough to the experiences of the public to connect with them in a meaningful way. Rob Asen, in his theoretical model for achieving trust,1 describes the qualities of flexibility, forthrightness, engagement, and heedfulness as conditions that manifest through deliberation, all providing the necessary environment for interlocutors to build trust in one another. Asen writes that the quality of flexibility during interaction demonstrates that parties hear and are willing to account for one another; forthrightness provides clarity and confirmation of what parties can expect from one another through their interaction; engagement “functions ethically by treating people as capable agents who may participate fully in a collaborative process of reaching a shared judgment,”2 1 Robert Asen, “Deliberation and Trust,” Argumentation & Advocacy 50, no. 1 (Summer 2013): 2–17. 2 Ibid., 12 3 while also “[enabling] participants to address the power relationships that may frustrate efforts to build trust;”3 finally, heedfulness assures interlocutors that their deliberation carries value. By first assuring voters that they are recognized and that their voices matter through flexibility, forthrightness, engagement, and heedfulness, politicians such as Clinton have the opportunity to present themselves as safe and relatable candidates, eager to hear public stories and identify with national struggles. The need to be clear, open, and relatable is key to being perceived as likeable, and achieving base levels of trusting communication. In order to be liked, candidates must be relatable, but they must also be authentic. In describing how deeply Americans value authenticity, Sarah Banet-Weiser writes that, “the concept of authenticity remains central to how individuals organize their everyday activities and craft their very selves.”4 In considering how they wish to craft their own identities, American citizens will go to lengths to consider how authentic another movement or person might be, before determining the extent to which they want to align their own identities with an outside force, if at all. Elizabeth Markovits, in her work on sincerity in democratic deliberation,5 details the extent to which Americans obsess over sincerity and truth-telling, especially from the mouths of politicians. In reminding readers how quickly American voters can decide to distrust a politician for not telling something exactly as it is, Markovits emphasizes the necessity for politicians to manifest their actions truthfully and transparently in order to be perceived as sincere. In measuring authenticity, shows of scripted performances, calculated gestures, and words that are said but never truly meant put voters off—people don’t like to be manipulated. Humans crave genuine connection to each other, and will always gravitate towards those who 3 Ibid., 13 4 Sarah Banet-Weiser, AuthenticTM: The Politics of Ambivalence in a Brand Culture (NYU Press, 2012). 5 Elizabeth Markovits, The Politics of Sincerity: Plato, Frank Speech, and Democratic Judgment (Penn State Press, 2010). 4 they believe are exhibiting their “real selves.” The candidate who appears most natural and open, therefore, like they are speaking from the heart, is easy to relate to, easy to like, and easy to trust. Furthermore, while the elements that come together to form a working definition of trust are essential to this study, equally essential is the aspect of gender. It is not insignificant that Hillary Clinton is one of America’s few women so widely known as more than a celebrity figure, but as a leader, carrying as much influence and power as the names of political men who have come before her. While gender does not account for all of the factors that form Clinton’s battle for trust with the American people, it plays an indisputable role in shaping the social expectations placed on Clinton and the nature in which her public critiques manifest. This foundational entanglement of gender and public perception inevitably invokes the question of how gender politics function at the core of Hillary’s rhetorical appeals to alter how she must present herself as trustworthy to the public. Parsing out the answer to this, along with other questions, is the beginning of understanding Clinton’s complex task of appearing trustworthy, and analyzing how she must go about strategically using rhetorical tools to invite, build, and maintain a relationship of trust with the American public. 1.2 The Significance of Hillary’s Road Differing from various rhetorical tools manipulated by other political figures, Clinton’s rhetorics of trust are unique to her in that few other politicians have been questioned as frequently and as aggressively on the nature of their ability to be trusted as Hillary Clinton has been throughout her 40 years in the public eye. Though these rhetorics of trust that Clinton draws from heavily throughout both current and past campaigns are not the only rhetorical appeals that she includes in her public discourse, they are significant because they trace back to core values at