Abstract:

Political actors, parties and their leaders perform motivating work in each election period to support the electorate and their own parties and formations. Political parties are trying to influence the electorate by using as many means as possible of communication during the election period. To influence the voter, political actors need to use some arguments that will convince the voter. One of the most important studies on the importance of argument in the political communication process is Steven Toulmin’s Argumentation Model. While the theoretical infrastructure of this study is processing Toulmin's argumentation model, the research section in the 2017 Constitutional Amendment Referendum has been attempted to resolve the convincing documents of the AK Party and CHP's leading representatives with the technique of speech analysis. Thus, it was tried to analyze which arguments the two parties had shown in the convincing documents. In the framework of the research work, yes and no-themed libraries and promotional videos that have been prepared by AK Party and CHP have been studied. The study found that both parties used the arguments that they set to bring the voters to the point they wanted in both written and video advertising in a common language. As a result, the use of arguments in political communication has been an important tool in terms of conviction, and the 2017 Constitution Amendment Referendum has also been strongly applied to the use of arguments.

Keywords:

Abstract:

Political actors, parties and leaders carry out motivational activities to support their own parties and organizations during each election period.. Political parties atry to influence the electorate by using as much communication tools as possible during the election period. Political actors need to use the arguments that would convince and thus influence the electorate. One of the most important studies on the significance of the argument in the process of political communication is the Argumentation Model of Steven Toulmin. In the theoretical background of this study, Toulmin’s argumentation model has been studied. In the research part of the 2017 Constitutional Amendment Referendum, the persuasive documents of the leading representatives of the yes and no parties, AKP and CHP have been analyzed with the discourse analysis technique. Thus, it was tried to analyze which arguments the two parties put forward in their persuasive documents. Within the scope of the research study, the yes and no themed booklets and promotional videos prepared by AK Party and CHP were examined. As a result of the study, it was seen that both parties used the common arguments in both the written and video introductions in order to bring the voters to the point they wanted. As a result, it was observed that the use of arguments in political communication which was also was heavily used in the 2017 referendum – was an important tool in terms of persuasion.