Abstract
At 10 o’clock in the evening, on 29 May 1996, as election ballots closed, the news anchors on Israeli television announced: According to the television sample polling, Shimon Peres has won the election for Prime Minister by a two per cent margin. However, during the long night which followed, as the real results from the various ballots accumulated, this tiny advantage shrank gradually. By next morning it became clear that victory had changed hands, making Netanyahu the winner, with a 14 900 votes advantage over Peres. This virtual tie between the two candidates had been established on 27 May, two days prior to the election, following the only television debate between the two candidates for Prime Minster on 26 May. On the eve of the debate the polls still showed the small but steady advantage Shimon Peres had over Netanyahu in the polls. Two days later, on 27 May, the most popular tabloid Yediot Achronot (read by 70 per cent of Israelis) came up with a verdict ‘Netanyahu was more convincing’. The next morning, with 24 hours to go, Netanyahu closed the gap in the polls, equalizing the two camps. Shimon Peres, at 72 years old an experienced political leader, Prime Minister in office, and the architect of the Oslo peace accord, who took over the premiership following the assassination of Prime Minister Rabin, lost to Biniamin Netanyahu, a 46 year-old, inexperienced politician, known for his telegenic qualities only.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Arian, A. (1996) ‘Neither mobilized nor mobilizing’. Ha’ayin Hashvi’it4. The Israeli Democracy Institute: Jerusalem.[in Hebrew]
Atkinson, M.(1984) Our Masters’ Voices: The Language and Body Language of Politics. Routledge Kegan Paul: London.
Auer, J.J. (1962) ‘The Counterfeit Debates’ in D. Krous The Great Debates in Carter vs Ford, Indiana University Press.
Bavelas, J.B., A. Black, N. Chovil, and J. Mullett (1990) Equivocal Communication. Sage: London and New Delhi.
Bilmes, J. (1995) ‘Questioning in the American vice-presidential debate: A study in interactional rhetoric: Part 1’. Paper delivered at the International Pragmatics Conference, Mexico, July.
Blum-Kulka, S. (1983) ‘The dynamics of political interviews’. Text, 3: 131–53.
Carlin, D.B and P.J. Bicak (1993) ‘Toward a theory of vice presidential debate purposes: an analysis of the 1992 vice presidential debate’. Argumentation and Advocacy 30: 119–30.
Ewen, S. (1988) All Consuming Images. Basic Books, New York.
Geertz, C. (1973) The Interpretation of Cultures. Basic Books, New York.
Goffman, E. (1981) Forms of Talk. University of Pennsylvania Press: Philadelphia.
Grice, H.P. (1975) ‘Logic and conversation’, in P. Cole and J. Morgan (eds), Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts (pp.43–59) Academic Press: New York.
Jamieson, K. (1992) Dirty Politics. Oxford University Press: New York.
Jucker, A. (1986) News Interviews: A Pragmalinguistic Analysis. John Benjamins: Amsterdam.
Katz, E. (1996). Annals of the American Academy of Political Science 546: 22–34.
Leiss, W., S. Kline and S. Jhally (1990) Social Communication in Advertising. Routledge, New York.
Liebes, T. and Y. Peri (1998) ‘Electronic journalism in segmented societies: Lessons from the 1996 elections’. Political Communication 15: 27–43.
Myers, D.G. (1996) Social Psychology. 3rd edn The Mcgraw-Hill Companies, Ine: Michigan.
Nir, R. (1988) ‘Electoral rhetorics in Israel - the televised debates’. Bikoret and Parshanut 24, 81–111 [in Hebrew].
Tolson, A. (1996) Mediations. Edward Arnold, London.
Winkler, C.K and C.F. Black (1993) ‘Assessing the 1992 presidential and vice presidential debates: the public rationale’. Argumentation and Advocacy30: 77–87.
Wolfsfeld, G. (unpublished manuscript). ‘Framing political events’.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2000 Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Blum-Kulka, S., Liebes, T. (2000). Peres versus Netanyahu: Television Wins the Debate, Israel 1996. In: Coleman, S. (eds) Televised Election Debates. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230379602_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230379602_4
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-0-333-73263-2
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-37960-2
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)