Modeling public perception in times of crisis: discursive strategies in Trump’s COVID-19 discourse

The article presents an attempt to analyze the strategic perspective of discourse, applying Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) concepts and Crisis Communication analytical tools. The study aims to reveal key strategies employed by a political actor to form public perception while communicating a crisis, based on Donald Trump's discourse on the COVID-19 pandemic. Results suggest four groups of strategies: (1) legitimization (through emotions, altruism, a hypothetical future, voices of expertise, rationality, defeasibility, simple denial and bolstering), (2) delegitimization (through negative evaluations, accusations, sarcasm, nicknaming, attacking the accuser, shifting the blame), (3) mitigation (transcendence and differentiation) and (4) intensification (through the use of repetitions, metaphors, superlatives, intensifiers). The research concludes that the macro goal underlying the described strategies is to present the Trump administration's efforts to address the COVID-19 pandemic as hard and effective. The study illustrates the use of language to model public perception and construct meaning in the context of a crisis. The research findings contribute to prior scientific inquiry into discursive strategies through suggesting a more comprehensive typology and extending CDA classifications by Crisis Communication categories.