Cited by 35Populism, Right-Wing MovementsMisinformation and Its ImpactsSocial Media and Politics

Populism as “Truth”: How Mediated Authenticity Strengthens the Populist Message

Open access
Enli, Gunn·2025·The International Journal of Press/Politics

Abstract

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

Crossref · 10.1177/19401612231221802

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Enli, G.
Affiliations
University of Oslo (NO)
Corresponding author
Enli, Gunn
Venue
The International Journal of Press/Politics
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
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