Verbal evasion among Iranian presidential candidates

Abstract

Clarity is an integral part of communication and a highly substantial speech principle. However, it is widely recognized that when public figures are confronted with unfavorable questions, they may choose to break the principle of clarity in communication and avoid direct reponses. In this regard, the present study attempts to provide a synopsis of the aspects of answering and evading employed by politicians in the context of Iran. To accomplish this goal, Bull's framework of evasion in news interviews and its subgenre was adopted. Data were collected from the tenth presidential candidates' debates in 2009 (the freest and the most controversial presidential debate, among others) between six Iranian candidates, including MirHosseyn Musavi, Mehdi Karubi, Mahmoud Ahmadinezhad, and Mohsen Rezaee. After analyzing the conversations, the questions in the debates were divided into two groups: those answered and those not. The unanswered questions, based on Bull's 12 techniques of evasion, were analyzed and incorporated into one of the 12 categories. The findings indicated that Iranian presidential candidates were largely evasive, and most of the time, they “ignored the question” when they were not eager to answer. Moreover, it was revealed that reformists, compared to fundamentalists, were more evasive.