Berge is an expert in the art of speaking convincingly, and Vedum is struggling with that in an interview on TV 2 on Thursday about cross-border trade, the rhetoric professor believes.
The feature states that the Center Party will reduce taxes to provide new Norwegian jobs.
The party leader gets several questions about how to handle this without cutting alcohol taxes.
When asked if alcohol is one of the most important reasons why people cross the border, Vedum points out that Pepsi Max is one of the most important reasons, before he gets a new question.
– Systembolaget in Strømstad has a turnover of two billion kroner a year, do you not agree that alcohol is one of the most important reasons why people cross the border?
– We in the Center Party believe that it is more important to have lower taxes on sausages and pizza than on pjolter and lager, Vedum answers, before he laughs out of the camera.
– He understands that he came crooked out of the jump – he tried in the overrun, so to speak, says Berge.
– What is he doing here?
– No, I do not know what to call it something, I. I think it’s rude, he does not answer questions and tries to laugh it off, and joke it away – what is it? I have not seen the like, I, not in Norway at least, comments the rhetoric professor.
Weaks credibility
To be convincing in the answer to what it is that is really the reason why people shop in Sweden, there is no point in pointing to Pepsi Max, he says.
– That is not how you should answer as a politician. These are important questions, cross-border trade costs society large sums. There are a lot of jobs we are talking about, and he can not shy away from such important questions in a junk and joking way – it’s just silly.
– But with this laughter, does he not become more popular, so that there is a shorter distance between him and the voters?
– Yes, in small doses, maybe, but not as a rhetorical move, it does not work. Laughter and humor can dampen conflicts, but what we know from research is that laughter can have a negative effect and weaken the credibility of the politician in question.
Becomes a syllabus in rhetoric teaching
Berges recommends the Center Party’s communication department to take a round with the party leader about how one should speak in Norwegian politics.
– You must answer properly and honestly even to complicated questions that come from the journalist here. I do not think this will be experienced in the party as a particularly good rhetorical statement from Slagsvold Vedum, I doubt it.
– Should he dampen his laughter?
– Yes, he can be himself, and relax, not true, but he can not laugh away questions, it does not work.
But Berge also sees a use value in the interview:
– I laugh to death, I have to include that element when we have political rhetoric this spring, he concludes.
Neither Trygve Slagsvold Vedum nor the head of communications in the Center Party have wanted to be interviewed in this case.
–
