Analyzing Media Coverage of a Presidential Scandal: Is Hillary Clinton Held to Account for Her Husband’S Impropriety?
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Colloquy Vol. 12, Fall 2016, pp. 22-38 Analyzing Media Coverage of a Presidential Scandal: Is Hillary Clinton Held to Account for Her Husband’s Impropriety? Emily M. Adams Abstract Forty-Second President of the United States Bill Clinton was impeached due to his engagement in an extramarital affair and a subsequent cover-up. Inconsistent with history, the U.S. public granted him absolution, signified by steady—even improved—approval ratings. His wife, Hillary Clinton, is currently deep into her second campaign for the U.S. presidency. This study involves a feminist textual analysis of media rhetoric as it relates to her, with the goal of answering the question: Do U.S. voters hold Hillary Clinton culpable for her husband’s indiscretions? Geraldine Ferraro introduced women to the modern national political stage for executive office when Walter Mondale chose her as his running mate in advance of the 1984 presidential election (Meeks 175). Had Mondale fared better in the polls, Ferraro’s viable candidacy would have embodied the true potential for women’s unadulterated acceptance onto the ballot as equals (Meeks 175). With Mondale’s overwhelming defeat in favor of a re-elected Ronald Reagan, though, the trail of bread crumbs Ferraro left as she navigated through the dense male- dominated political forest grew stale. It was 24 years before U.S. voters took another woman seriously as a candidate for a run at the White House (Meeks 175). That year was 2008, when in fact both major political parties each placed a woman on its ticket: Democrat Hillary Clinton, and Republican John McCain’s vice presidential pick, Sarah Palin. Even two full decades following the Mondale-Ferraro campaign, these women were subjected to an onslaught of sexism and female stereotypes by the media (Meeks 175). This means that they fell prey to the same at the hands of the public, at least by extension (Meeks 175). In Clinton’s case, she suffered the additional gloomy ubiquity of her husband’s illicit extramarital affairs. Hillary Clinton is again in the throes of a campaign for executive office. In this paper, I will explore whether or not public perception prevails that the former New York Senator and Secretary of State is somehow responsible for her husband Analyzing Media Coverage of a Presidential Scandal 23 having infamously veered sharply out of Monogamy Lane. I will do so by using the lens of feminist critique to conduct a textual analysis of the rhetoric presented in selected current media publications and articles in scholarly journals. In the first portion of what follows, I will discuss Bill Clinton’s egregious past, define textual analysis, and explain feminist critique. I will then proceed to examine media framing in an effort to understand gender bias as an effect of the institution of patriarchy. I will conclude by offering my perspective of Hillary Clinton’s prevailing public perception, and her current chances of winning the presidency. Overtly Surreptitious Bill Clinton became the second U.S. president ever to face impeachment (Miller 226), and ultimately did so for lying to Congress about an extramarital liaison with White House intern, Monica Lewinsky. The scandal was in full swing to the right at the halfway point of Clinton’s second term, and what concerned many political observers was that the upheaval would serve to undermine the remainder of the president’s incumbency and damage his long-term credibility (Berke). Night and day, television hosts had plenty of show time fodder as they discussed the issue at various, seemingly–countless angles while ensuring to stay at a legal distance with disclaimers that allegations of misconduct are not proof of it (Bronner). In reference to the scandal-of-yore that caused the Nixon Administration to crumble, and its namesake to resign in shame, Geraldo Rivera referred to the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal as “Zippergate” on his CNBC telecast (Bronner). Impeachment proceedings were underfoot a mere two-and-a-half months prior to the midterm elections, and the democrats worried that the president’s extramarital chaos would flip the political status quo onto its ear and send voters and pundits into an unprecedented frenzy of confusion (Berke). Television producers even provided airtime to psychologists who gave advice to parents regarding how best to approach the subject of the president’s indiscretions with their curious children (Bronner). Not on Our Aggregated Watch Many Democrats at the time hesitated to scorn Clinton for choosing a recalcitrant path. An exception was a candidate by the name of Tim McCown, who was campaigning for a seat in Maryland’s House of Representatives. McCown called for the president to resign, but due to the lies, not the extramarital sex. About the sex, McCown said, “That’s between Bill and Hillary” (Berke). 24 E.M. Adams Another fellow Democrat exuding sharp-tongued displeasure was California Senator Dianne Feinstein. Even as a Clinton ally, she let him have it, proclaiming, “I was present in the Roosevelt Room [of the White House] in January when the president categorically denied any sexual involvement with Monica Lewinsky. I believed him. His remarks last evening leave me with a deep sense of sadness in that my trust in his credibility has been badly shattered” (Berke). Clinton’s left-wing allies had company in their discontent and misery, though; the Republicans made sure to relentlessly emphasize their disdain for his sexual liaisons (Miller 233). The fact that the middle-aged president had allegedly gallivanted with a 21 year-old intern was marked as too much of a morally- inappropriate cross to bear. Both members of the voting public, as well as politicians from all parties, were forced to call into question whether or not the sitting president had any hint of a moral compass (Miller 233). He Lied About Having Sexual Relations with That Woman At least as poignant, perhaps, as the president’s potential to have engaged in Oval Office trysts with a youngling was his active participation in a cover-up. The scandal set the country a-twitter, resuscitating anew people’s active engagement in the U.S. political scene (Bronner). The allegations set tongues wagging across the country from East to West and throughout the Middle. This sex scandal was an event for the ages—and it gave historians motivation to rehash rhetoric about White House scandals of eras past (Bronner). Even Clinton’s former press secretary, Dee Dee Myers, appeared on NBC’s Today to air her opinion. Myers admitted a significant amount of harm had befallen Clinton’s reputation, regardless of the soundness of the allegations put forth (Miller 233). She continued, “I think this is going to be something the president is going to have a hard time living down. If he’s not telling the truth, I think the consequences are just astronomical” (Miller 233). Now that I have elucidated the Clinton back story, I will move to articulating my methodology. Of Course the Discourse Decides the Course Before conducting a textual analysis, it is important to ensure that my readers have clarity with regards to the associated terminology. It is a common assumption for speakers of English that “text” refers to language in written form, and its spoken counterpart is “discourse” (Alba Juez 6). According to Alba Juez, though, “[M]odern linguistics has introduced a new meaning to the word text, which includes every type of utterance” (6). According to Schiffren, Tannen, and Analyzing Media Coverage of a Presidential Scandal 25 Hamilton, expressive, or social communication refers to the knack for conveying personal identities and attitudes through language (54). Another relevant type of linguistic communication is textual, which refers to meanings encompassed within discourse in excess of one sentence (Schiffren 54). What this means is that any declaration, assertion, or articulated idea, whether written or spoken, falls within the definition of “text,” and thereby lends itself to analysis. For purposes of this study, the term “rhetoric,” meanwhile, is specific to the ways in which people use language to create understanding, produce knowledge, and negotiate power (“What is Rhetoric?”). An adequate starting point for conducting a feminist critique of the varied texts and rhetoric circumforaneous to my site—Hillary Clinton’s presidential candidacies—is with perceptions generated by television. The interpretation of texts will help me decide if the general public, based upon the messages delivered through the media, continues to blame Hillary Clinton for past indiscretions committed by her husband. These are indiscretions for which the populace seems to have granted the offender forgiveness. Diametric Depictions The mainstream media provided Bill Clinton the opportunity to engage in another love affair in 2008. Framing him as a staunch, noteworthy supporter of his wife’s push toward the White House simultaneously undercut public perception of Hillary Clinton’s competence (Khan and Blair 60). Particularly poignant was the media’s portrayal of Bill as cool, calm, and steady, and Hillary as an ice queen (Khan and Blair 60). Members of the media did overtly call out the male Clinton for sexual improprieties of decades past. Even the harshest of such criticism, though, served to fortify that Mr. Clinton’s masculinity, and masculinity in general, is a quality inherent to matter-of-fact leadership, while at the same time took Mrs. Clinton task for her apparent inability to manage her own husband (Khan and Blair 63). What the media created during this time was a narrative that a husband with a reputation for straying was an embarrassment waiting to happen should his wife win the White House (Khan and Blair 63). The portrayal of Bill Clinton, meanwhile, was that he was a phoenix who had risen from the ashes of the fire caused by an inextinguishable yet human sexual appetite, and Hillary Clinton was still trying to crawl out of the rubble (Khan and Blair 63).