He goes from the reporter forcing him a loaded question to the reporter giving him free air time.
I feel there is a change in the power dynamic but I cannot work out what exactly plays off here.
But I think what he does is usually used as a haggling tactic. I wonder where he learnt how to do this.
I noticed that though he raises his voice a bit when he’s getting into the more sort of territorial part of the interaction while she spouts her talking points, when he actually gets to his own point he lowers his voice a bit.
This is really clever. Not only does he know that he’ll get his point across better with less volume and stress in his voice, but he compartmentalizes the two parts of the conversation and draws a clear delineation between them. On the one hand there’s the sort of social-territorial posturing where the words aren’t really carrying factual meaning so much as being a means of claiming space. This is the arena where Fox’s reporter is comfortable, though clearly Bernie knows his way around as well.
When he starts bringing up his own substantive points, he does so at a lower volume with an even tone. It feels like a totally different interview, because the Fox reporter literally doesn’t even know how to exist in this space.
She’s trained to compete on that level of pecking at one another to vie for status. Right-wing politics has become entirely about dragging the discussion down to that level. But if you manage to bounce right off of it and bring it back to reality the way Bernie does here, they have nothing.
Literally her only move is to bring it back down into posturing, but he already beat her in that arena.
She’s trained to compete on that level of pecking at one another to vie for status.
This must be it. She must see politicians responding to her as proof of her status. Because the moment he begins walking away from her is when she turns submissive.
Many books have been written about it in the last 3000 years, since Ancient Greece.
The reporter tries to bring down the discussion to a sentiment-based shouting match (also part of rhetoric, called “trolling” in recent times), while Bernie answers by shouting over her points (“I can shout as loud as you”), then goes back to a clear delivery of his own points.
When one party has no solid arguments, while the other does, it’s the dynamic that comes out:
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !politics@beehaw.org
In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it’s a political happening, you can post it here.
Guidelines for submissions:
Where possible, post the original source of information.
If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
deleted by creator
I noticed that though he raises his voice a bit when he’s getting into the more sort of territorial part of the interaction while she spouts her talking points, when he actually gets to his own point he lowers his voice a bit.
This is really clever. Not only does he know that he’ll get his point across better with less volume and stress in his voice, but he compartmentalizes the two parts of the conversation and draws a clear delineation between them. On the one hand there’s the sort of social-territorial posturing where the words aren’t really carrying factual meaning so much as being a means of claiming space. This is the arena where Fox’s reporter is comfortable, though clearly Bernie knows his way around as well.
When he starts bringing up his own substantive points, he does so at a lower volume with an even tone. It feels like a totally different interview, because the Fox reporter literally doesn’t even know how to exist in this space.
She’s trained to compete on that level of pecking at one another to vie for status. Right-wing politics has become entirely about dragging the discussion down to that level. But if you manage to bounce right off of it and bring it back to reality the way Bernie does here, they have nothing.
Literally her only move is to bring it back down into posturing, but he already beat her in that arena.
This is the way forward.
Now this is an interesting observation.
This must be it. She must see politicians responding to her as proof of her status. Because the moment he begins walking away from her is when she turns submissive.
It’s called: rhetoric
Many books have been written about it in the last 3000 years, since Ancient Greece.
The reporter tries to bring down the discussion to a sentiment-based shouting match (also part of rhetoric, called “trolling” in recent times), while Bernie answers by shouting over her points (“I can shout as loud as you”), then goes back to a clear delivery of his own points.
When one party has no solid arguments, while the other does, it’s the dynamic that comes out:
Business/politics as usual, really.