In:The Construction of ‘Ordinariness’ across Media Genres
Edited by Anita Fetzer and Elda Weizman
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 307] 2019
► pp. 133–156
“I can do math, but I’m not that smart. I’m not brilliant”
Ordinariness as a discursive resource in United States radiophonic financial call-in interactions
Published online: 12 December 2019
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.307.06dor
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.307.06dor
Abstract
Radio call-in shows, mainly political ones, are prevalent in discursive research, dating back to Hutchby’s influential work. This chapter discusses the leading United States economic self-help radio call-in show, “The Dave Ramsey show” and how ordinariness is used in it. The host, Dave Ramsey, advises callers, and the audience, regarding their economic behavior. This counseling creates a paradox: an expert-millionaire advises ordinary people and fans regarding their economic struggles. The host presents himself as ordinary to solve this paradox. Ramsey constructs his ordinariness using vernacular language, referring to a shared ‘common-sense,’ using mundane stories and relating to the callers as a family. Then, the chapter discusses two interactions with “non-ordinary” callers, a poor and a rich caller, to show the uses of the ordinariness practices in them. The conclusion connects the ordinariness of the host to his neoconservative ideology, to point to the notion of ordinary success he tries to deliver.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Contextualizing the “The Dave Ramsey Show”
- 3.Ramsey’s practices for creating ordinariness
- 3.1Using vernacular language
- 3.2Building shared common-sense
- 3.3Being similar and close to the callers
- 4.Bring me the poor and the rich, and I’ll make them and me ordinary
- 5.The ordinary success as an ideological ploy
Acknowledgment: Notes References
References (30)
Billig, Michael. 1999. “Whose Terms? Whose Ordinariness? Rhetoric and Ideology in Conversation Analysis.” Discourse & Society 10 (4): 543–582.
Coupland, Nikolas. 2016. “Labov, Vernacularity and Sociolinguistic Change.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 20 (4): 409–430.
Dori-Hacohen, Gonen. 2012a. “The Commercial and the Public “Public Spheres”: Two Types of Political Talk-Radio and their Constructed Publics.” Journal of Radio and Audio Media
19
(2): 134–151.
. 2012b. ““With whom do I have the pleasure?”: Callers’ Categories in Political Talk Radio Programs.” Journal of Pragmatics 44 (3): 280–297.
. 2013. ““Rush, I love you”: Interactional Fandom on American Political Talk-Radio.” International Journal of Communication 7: 2697–2719.
. 2014. “Establishing Social Groups in Hebrew: ‘We’ in Political Radio Phone-In Programs.” In Constructing Collectivity: ‘We’ across Languages and Contexts ed. by Theodossia-Soula Pavlidou, 187–206. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Drew, Paul, and Elisabeth Holt. 1995. “The Role of Idioms in the Organisation of Topic in Conversation.” Idioms: Structural and psychological perspectives 1: 17–31.
Fetzer, Anita, and Elda Weizman. 2018. ““What I would say to John and everyone like John is …”: The Construction of Ordinariness Through Quotations in Mediated Political discourse.” Discourse & Society, 0957926518770259.
Fitzgerald, Richard, and William Housley. 2002. “Identity, Categorization and Sequential Organization: The Sequential and Categorial Flow of Identity in a Radio Phone-In.” Discourse & Society 13 (5): 579–602.
Ganje, Lucy A. 2003. “Native American Stereotypes.” In Images that Injure: Pictorial Stereotypes in the Media, ed. by Ross, Susan Dente, and Paul Martin Lester, 113–120. Westport, CT; London: Prager.
Gergen, Kenneth J., and Mary M. Gergen. 1997. “Narratives of the Self.” In Memory, Identity, Community: The Idea of Narrative in the Human Sciences, ed. by Hinchman, Lewis P., and Sandra Hinchman, 161–184. State University of New York Press.
Hutchby, Ian. 1996. Confrontation Talk, Arguments, Asymmetries, and Power on Talk Radio. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
. 2001. “‘Witnessing’: The Use of First-Hand Knowledge in Legitimating Lay Opinions on Talk Radio.” Discourse Studies 3 (4): 481–497.
Jefferson, Gail. 2004. “Glossary of Transcript Symbols with an Introduction.” In Conversation Analysis: Studies from the first generation, ed by Lerner, Gene H., 13–31. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Kamio, Akio. 2001. “English Generic We, You, and They: An Analysis in Terms of Territory of Information.” Journal of Pragmatics 33 (7): 1111–1124.
Katriel, Tamar. 2004. Dialogic Moments: From Soul Talks to Talk Radio in Israeli Culture. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.
Livingstone, Sonia M., and Peter Lunt. 1994. Talk on Television: Audience Participation and Public Debate. London; New York: Routledge.
Peterson, Richard A. 2013. Creating Country Music: Fabricating Authenticity. University of Chicago Press.
Phelan, Sean. 2007. “The Discourses of Neoliberal Hegemony: The Case of the Irish Republic.” Critical Discourse Studies 4 (1): 29–48.
Sacks, Harvey. 1972. “On the Analyzability of Stories by Children.” In Directions in Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of Communication, ed. by John J. Gumperz and Dell Hymes, 325–345. New York: Rinehart & Winston.
. 1984. “On Doing ‘Being Ordinary’.” In Structures of Social Action, ed. by Maxwell J. Atkinson and John Heritage, 413–429. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schegloff, Emmanuel A. and Gene H. Lerner. 2009. “Beginning to Respond: Well-Prefaced Responses to WH-Questions.” Research on Language & Social Interaction 42 (2): 91–115.
Shrikant, Natasha and Jeanette Musselwhite. 2019. “Indexing Neoliberal Ideology and Political Identities in a Racially Diverse Business Community.” Discourse & Communication 13 (1): 119–137.