Populism as “Truth”: How Mediated Authenticity Strengthens the Populist Message
Open accessAbstract
The rise of populism is often explained by political factors, economic factors, and media and communication factors. This article analyzes populism in the context of an increased focus on authenticity in political communication. The main aim is to discuss to what degree mediated authenticity strengthens the populist message and what consequences the nexus between authenticity and populism might have for the quality of democratic governance. As a theoretical backdrop, the article discusses the implications of increased valorization of authenticity in times of distrust, and how perforned truth is a key appeal of populism in representative democracies. The methodological approach is a systematic analysis of seven authenticity strategies identified in previous research: consistency, spontaneity, ordinariness, confession, immediacy, ambivalence, and imperfection. In addition to the theoretical analysis, the article offers a case study of the performance of Donald Trump, focusing on how mediated authenticity strengthens the populist message. The study is conducted in a mainly U.S.-context and includes material collected between 2016 and 2023. A key argument is that although performed authenticity can be both advantageous and disadvantageous, depending on the status of the candidate, there is lower risk involved for populist politicians than mainstream politicians because the strategies correspond more with the ideology. In conclusion, the article argues that performed authenticity…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Los resultados del estudio de la campaña presidencial de 2021 permiten comprender patrones que persisten en procesos electorales actuales y futuros, dada la continuidad de patrones como el uso selectivo de recursos interactivos, la orientación del discurso hacia públicos específicos y la construcción de entornos polarizados.
“Si bien se enfoca en la campaña presidencial del 2021 sus resultados permiten comprender patrones que persisten en los procesos electorales más recientes (López-Fierro & Pacheco-Villamar, 2021;Enli, 2025).”
From Twitter/X en la campaña presidencial de 2021 en Ecuador: interacciones digitales y su proyección en la polarización política de las siguientes campañas (2025) · cites this paper as Enli, 2025
Cites
Mass Communication and Para-Social Interaction
Horton, D., & Richard Wohl, R. (1956) · Psychiatry · doi:10.1080/00332747.1956.11023049 · Cited by 4,380 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Luzuriaga Uribe, E., & Baquerizo-Neira, G. (2025) · Perspectivas de la comunicación · doi:10.56754/0718-4867.2025.3765
- Authors
- Enli, G.
- Affiliations
- University of Oslo (NO)
- Corresponding author
- Enli, Gunn
- ORCID
- Enli, Gunn
- Venue
- The International Journal of Press/Politics
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2024-01-28
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 83-99
- ISSN
- 1040-1620 (ISSN-L)
- 1940-1612
- 1940-1620
- OpenAlex
- W4391293343
- Cited by
- 35
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 15 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 2
- FWCI
- 56.17
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- The International Journal of Press/Politics (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Duo Research Archive (University of Oslo) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Populism, Right-Wing Movements
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
- Keywords
- populism, authenticity, political communication, Donald Trump, post-truth politics, conspiracy theories, hate speech, democratic governance, public trust in government
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review