In The Presidential Road Show: Public Leadership in an Era of Party Polarization and Media Fragmentation, Diane J. Heith evaluates presidential leadership by critically examining a fundamental tenet of the presidency: the national nature of the office. The fact that the entire nation votes for the office seemingly imbues the presidency with leadership opportunities that rest on appeals to the mass public. Yet, presidents earn the office not by appealing to the nation but rather by assembling a coalition of supporters, predominantly partisans. Moreover, once in office, recent presidents have had trouble controlling their message in the fragmented media environment. The combined constraints of the electoral coalition and media environment influence the nature of public leadership presidents can exercise. Using a data set containing not only speech content but also the classification of the audience, Diane J. Heith finds that rhetorical leadership is constituency driven and targets audiences differently. Comparing tone, content, and tactics of national and local speeches reveals that presidents are abandoning national strategies in favor of local leadership efforts that may be tailored to the variety of political contexts a president must confront.

The End of the Rhetorical Presidency? Public Leadership in the Trump Era explores one of the most disruptive aspects of the Trump presidency. Since the FDR administration, presidents developed the capacity and skill to use the public to influence the legislative arena, gain reelection, survive scandal and secure their legacy. Consequently, presidential rhetorical leadership has its own norms and expectations. Comparing President Trump’s communications apparatus as well as rhetoric (including Twitter) to previous presidents, Diane Heith demonstrates how Trump exercises leadership by adhering to some of these norms and expectations, but rejects, abandons and undermines most. Heith argues that his individual, rather than institutional, approach to leadership represents a change in tone, language and style. She concludes that the loss of skill and capacity represents a devolution of the White House institution dedicated to public leadership, especially in the legislative arena. More significantly, the individual approach emphasizes weakening the ability of the press and other political elites to hold the president accountable. This book will appeal to students and scholars of the presidency as well as general readers who quest for a deeper understanding of the Trump White House.

When Ronald Reagan invoked "a shining city on a hill" or George H. W. Bush "a thousand points of light," their words were engraved on the public's consciousness as signatures to their personal beliefs and a catalysts for political action. Such iconic phrases in presidential speeches are often the creation of presidential speechwriters, who are entrusted with framing a message consistent with each administration's broad goals and reflecting each president's personality and rhetorical skills. This book takes a closer look at presidential speeches over the course of six administrations. Editors Michael Nelson and Russell Riley have brought together an outstanding team of academics and professional writers-including nine former speechwriters who worked for every president from Nixon to Clinton-to examine how the politics and crafting of presidential rhetoric serve the various roles of the presidency. They consider four types of speeches: convention acceptance speeches, inaugural addresses, state of the union addresses, and crisis and other landmark speeches that often rise out of unpredictable circumstances. Together, these scholars and writers enable readers to sort out the idiosyncratic from the institutional while gaining insider perspectives on the operating style and rhetorical manner of each of the six presidents. The book is rich in character sketches-such as Jimmy Carter's attempt to tie his understanding of original sin to the practice of American politics-and brimming with insights into the internal dynamics of the White House, including tales of internecine bloodletting under Ronald Reagan. Most significant, these discussions help us better understand the contemporary presidency by revealing the enduring and evolving features of the institution, underscoring how the operating style and rhetorical manner of each president shapes the speechwriting process in the service of his broader policymaking goals. These essays show not only how speechmaking has become a major presidential activity but also how speechwriters have become important political actors in their own right. They offer students and observers of the political scene a rare opportunity to consider the crafting of those utterances before weighing their effects.

"Containing the public messages, speeches, and statements of the President", 1956-1992.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act came into existence at a time when the president’s ability to lead the public was in question, political polarization had intensified, and the media environment appeared ever more fragmented, fast-moving, and resistant to control. Under such circumstances, how can contemporary American presidents such as Barack Obama build and maintain support for themselves and their policies, particularly as controversies arise? Using case studies of major contests over how key elements of the Affordable Care Act would be framed, and analysis of how those frames fared in influential and popular U.S. news sources, Hopper examines the conditions under which the president can effectively shape public debates today. She argues that despite the difficult political and communications context, the president retains substantial advantages in framing major controversial issues for the media and the public. These presidential framing advantages are conditional, however, and Hopper explores the factors that help make presidential frames more or less likely to gain hold in the news today. More so than in the past, an element of unpredictability in this news environment means that in pursuing favorable messaging, the president and his surrogates may also generate some unintentional consequences in how issues are portrayed to the public. Presidential frames can evolve with unfolding events to take on new meanings and applications, a process facilitated alternately by supporters, opponents, and media actors. Still, media figures and political opponents remain largely reactive to presidential communications, even as some seek to publicize and exploit weaknesses in the administration’s narratives. A close look at these recent cases casts new light on the scholarly debate surrounding the president’s ability to persuasively communicate and challenges conventional wisdom that the 21st century media largely present an unmanageable news environment for the White House. Presidential Framing in the 21st Century News Media engages with current events in American politics, focusing on the Obama Administration and the Affordable Care Act, while also reflecting upon the state of the American presidency, the news media, and the public in ways that have substantial implications for all of these actors, not merely in the present, but into the future, making it a compelling read for scholars of Political Science, Media Studies, Communication Studies, and Public Policy.

Is Donald Trump’s "War on the Media" new news, fake news, or business as usual? Presidents have always "used" the media and felt abused by it. Tried and true vehicles such as press conferences, routine speeches and the State of the Union address have served presidents’ interests and received significant coverage by the print media. As new technologies have entered the media spectrum, the speed and pervasiveness of these interactions have changed dramatically. President Obama ushered in the social media presidency, while President Trump has become the tweeter-in-chief. This book shows how each of these developments affects what is communicated and how it is received by the public.

This book develops a theory of presidential public leadership taking into account the partisan nature of the political debate and the role of presidents.