Reassessing the Assumptions behind the Evolution of Popular Presidential Communication

Headnote

Most scholars agree that the presidency underwent an important evolution in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. However, the causes of these changes continue to be subject to rigorous debate. Using a multimethod approach, I find that the political opportunities and incentives that presented themselves in the nineteenth and early twentieth century shaped presidential rhetorical behavior rather than the president's personal or partisan ideology.

(ProQuest: ... denotes formulae omitted.)

Scholars broadly agree that there was an important evolution in popular presidential communication during the eighteen and early nineteenth centuries. However, the causes behind the increased frequency of spoken presidential rhetoric are the subject of vigorous scholarly debate. This disagreement can be distilled to two essential arguments: changes in presidential rhetorical behavior either were the product of a changing set of cultural norms and ideas or were the result of the presidents taking advantage of the emergence of new strategic opportunities provided by technology and changes in the structure of political parties. I propose to clarify the issues in this debate by presenting an analysis based on new data and a multimethod research strategy.

In this article, I challenge many of the common assumptions about the rhetorical behavior of early presidents and look closely at a number of competing claims surrounding the mode (spoken vs. written), content (intellectual quality), audience (who the president is addressing), and frequency (number of times the president speaks) of spoken popular presidential communication (SPPC).1 I show through a number of empirical tests that the political opportunities and incentives that presented themselves in the nineteenth and early twentieth century shaped presidential rhetorical behavior rather than the president's personal or partisan ideology. I present a coherent, alternative view to the claim that ideas were responsible for changes in the communication strategies of American presidents. In sum, the rhetorical practices of American presidents evolved over time in response to a changing political landscape.

Presidential Popular Communication

Jeffrey Tulis (1987) hypothesized that Woodrow Wilson and his innovative conception of the constitutional role of the executive was fundamental in the development of the twentieth-century rhetorical presidency. Frequently cited with Tulis, is Samuel Kernell (1993) whose causal mechanism was different: a decline in party strength and a changing media environment led presidents to bypass the...