This article was downloaded by: [University of Bucharest ]

On: 19 March 2015, At: 10:08

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:
1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street,
London W1T 3JH, UK

New Jersey Journal of

Communication
Publication details, including instructions for
authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hajc19

The nonverbal
communication of president
Bill Clinton
Maureen C. Minielli

a b

Doctoral candidate at the Pennsylvania State

University
b

Assistant Professor of Speech Communication ,

St. Cloud State University , St. Cloud, MN,
563014498
Published online: 17 Mar 2009.

To cite this article: Maureen C. Minielli (1999) The nonverbal communication of

president Bill Clinton, New Jersey Journal of Communication, 7:2, 190-205, DOI:
10.1080/15456879909367367
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15456879909367367

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all
the information (the Content) contained in the publications on our
platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors
make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy,
completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of
the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis.
The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be
independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and
Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings,
demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever

or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in

relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

Downloaded by [University of Bucharest ] at 10:08 19 March 2015

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study
purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution,
reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access
and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-andconditions

The New Jersey Journal of Communication, Volume 7, No. 2, Fall 1999, pages 190-205

The Nonverbal Communication of President Bill

Clinton

Downloaded by [University of Bucharest ] at 10:08 19 March 2015

Maureen C. Minielli1
Nonverbal communication offers political communication scholars the opportunity to examine public
figures beyond the traditional rhetorical realm. As a way of beginning the dialogue, this essay
examines the nonverbal communication of President Bill Clinton during both presidential terms. This
essay argues that Clinton was on a course of developing and refining his nonverbal communication
skills until the Lewinsky scandal surfaced. Previously following a personal nonverbal communication
style, Clinton was suddenly forced to switch communication strategies emphasizing a public and
private Clinton during the scandal. Once the scandal and subsequent impeachment trial subsided,
Clinton appears to be returning to the personal approach that has become a hallmark of his
presidency.

Only man among living things reconstructs his past, perceives his present
condition, and anticipates his future through symbols that abstract, screen,
condense, distort, displace, and even create what the senses bring to his
attention. The ability to manipulate sense perceptions symbolically permits
complex reasoning and planning and consequent efficacious action. It also
facilitates firm attachments to illusions, misperceptions, and myths and
consequent misguided or self-defeating action (Edelman, 1971, p. 2).

It is ironic that this essay focuses on the nonverbal communication of President

Bill Clinton given that acts of nonverbal communication nearly ended his
presidency. The well-publicized sex scandal involving Monica Lewinsky was just
as much about nonverbal communication as it was verbal. The physical acts of
romantic touching (for lack of a better collective phrase), gifts of ties, allegations
of "Peyronie's Disease," defiant finger wagging, and one blue dress, are equally,
if not more important, than the words that were used to describe, allege, attack
or defend them.
President Bill Clinton is considered to be one of most skilled presidential
orators from this century. His ability to persuade and to reach the people in a
personal manner has become a trademark of Clinton's oratorical style. It is a new
style that Marlin Fitzwater, former press secretary to Presidents Ronald Reagan

1. Maureen C. Minielli (M.A., Pennsylvania State University) is a doctoral candidate at the

Pennsylvania State University and an Assistant Professor of Speech Communication at St. Cloud State
University, St. Cloud, MN 56301-4498. A version of this article was presented at the Eighty-fourth
Annual Meeting of the National Communication Association, New York, NY, 1998. The author would
like to thank the anonymous NJJC reviewers for their valuable editorial contributions.
Copyright 1999 by Maureen C. Minielli. All Rights Reserved

Downloaded by [University of Bucharest ] at 10:08 19 March 2015

The Nonverbal Communication of President Bill Clinton 191

and George Bush, claims has set a new standard for the American presidency that
future presidents will have to master (Neikirk, 1997).
This personal approach allows Clinton to appear as a man of the people, a
member of the American public while at the same time serving America as
President of the United States. It also allows Clinton to cultivate the image of a
warm, caring, attentive and personal President. It was that image that helped
Clinton win the general election of 1992, and one he desperately tried to maintain
up to the halfway point of his second presidential term. The Lewinsky debacle
revealed the tension between the private and public Bill Clinton, the juggling
between the Clinton as President, and the Clinton as husband, father, and
adulterer. Further, through the strain of the Lewinsky scandal, a tightly
constructed presidential image, six-and-one-half-years in the making, began to
crack.
Most contemporary discussions of Clinton's nonverbal usage center on a few
key issues such as character and public image. Missing from the conversation is
Clinton's use of other forms of nonverbal communication and how this use
supplements, enhances, or replaces his verbal communication. This essay begins
to correct this oversight by examining Clinton's nonverbal communication usage
during his two presidential terms. It is argued that Clinton's use of nonverbal
communication since 1992 foreshadowed and eventually crystallized the
dichotomy between the public and private Bill Clinton, two separate images that
began as one but eventually split into two in January 1998.
The theories, techniques and effects of nonverbal communication are welldocumented in nonverbal communication literature (Birdwhistell, 1952;
Birdwhistell, 1970; Knapp, 1978). The study of nonverbal communication
involves the examination of behaviors that are often ambiguous and unclear. As
Burgoon (1985) and others have pointed out, nonverbal acts often carry several
different messages at the same time, with those messages carrying different
meanings and interpretations. Despite the advances made in the study of
nonverbal communication and political communication, many questions remain.
Although itself incomplete, this essay hopes to expand further the conversation
of nonverbal behavior and political communication, and in particular, the
American presidency, by going beyond previous scopes of image analysis. This
examination of Clinton's use of proxemics, paralanguage, and artifactual
communication can serve as a beginning for expanded exploration of a president's
nonverbal communication from a political and rhetorical perspective. It is through
the wedding of verbal and nonverbal communication that examination of a
president's communication style becomes more complete.

The New Jersey Journal of Communication, Volume 7, No. 2, Fall 1999

192 Maureen C. Minielli

Downloaded by [University of Bucharest ] at 10:08 19 March 2015

Clinton's Presidential Image

Goffman (1963, 1967, 1969, 1974) argued that individuals present themselves
as actors who engage in public and private situations with the intent of creating
a persona that is both acceptable and impressionable with the actor's listeners.
Goffman (1974) claims: "Often what talkers undertake to do is not to provide
information to a recipient but to present dramas to an audience. Indeed, it seems
that we spend most of our time not engaged in giving information but in giving
shows "(p. 508).
Applying Goffman's observations to political communication, the idea of
persona construction translates to political image construction, and for purposes
of this essay, the presidential image of President Bill Clinton. The creation and
maintenance of Clinton's presidential image are well documented in both
academic and mainstream works. Missing from those discussions, one that this
section hopes to shed light on, is how Clinton's image has changed since taking
office, and more importantly, why.
During the 1992 presidential election, Clinton adapted the personal style that
was to become a hallmark of his presidency as well as change the institution of
the American presidency. Kendall (1995) and Trent and Trent (1995) both found
that Clinton excelled in the use of personalized communication, both in speaking
with voters as well as listening to them. Adept at language and metaphor usage,
Clinton's 1992 presidential success was the result of reconstructing his victory as
a victory of and for the people, and outmatching his opponents in the
identification race (Kendall, 1995).
During Clinton's first few months in office, though, his personalized public
approach did not quite match up with his private demeanor. Unable to relax in
formal and informal settings as in his Arkansas governorship, and aware of his
Washington outsider status, Clinton began to display the split personality of the
Public President and the Private President, a distinction Clinton would use later
on when responding to allegations of sexual misconduct with Monica Lewinsky.
Woodward (1996) argued that the public persona posed Clinton as a charismatic
and thoughtful communicator, the man of the people. The private persona was
completely opposite, though, depicting Clinton as an angry, two-faced backbiter,
ill at ease in his new surroundings.
By the time reelection strategies were being considered, Clinton's private image
was in need of revamping. In June 1994, advisors suggested that Clinton control
his temper and eliminate the swearing known to color his language. "'It's not
easy,' says one high Administration official. "The President uses the F word a
lot'" ("Let's get presidential," 1994, p. 20). Walking the line between being a
man of the people and a man above the people was beginning to become difficult

The New Jersey Journal of Communication, Volume 7, No. 2, Fall 1999

Downloaded by [University of Bucharest ] at 10:08 19 March 2015

The Nonverbal Communication of President Bill Clinton 193

for Clinton. It was clear that a presidential image change was needed from the
one presented to the American public during the first presidential election and
term.
A retooled presidential look accompanied Clinton during the 1996 presidential
election. Morris (1997) pointed out that Clinton self-deprecated too much and
needed to start speaking to audiences instead of holding conversations with them,
causing Clinton to appear too youthful. Morris claimed Clinton adopted a fatherly
approach in his speeches, which helped him move further away from the regular
guy image of the 1992 presidential campaign.
According to McGrory (1997), it worked. Commenting during the 1997
Inauguration week, McGrory stated that "Clinton, the scamp," had transformed
himself into a father figure. His actions of the previous two years, including his
reactions to the April 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, represented him to be more
like a father than a big brother. "He took the nation in his arms and patted it on
the shoulder. He was big, strong, enveloping, the healer, comforter" (p. A9).
Novak (1997) concluded that in 1992, Clinton appealed to voters as a man of the
people whereas in 1996, he appealed to voters as a man of the people and as a
leader simultaneously.
Clinton's image revision warrants some critical commentary. First, die
transformation of Bill Clinton reinforces the idea that image is dynamic. Second,
it illustrates the ability to successfully alter a nationally known figure's persona
from one image into a second, completely different one, and that image
transformation does not happen immediately, but instead occurs over time. Third,
Clinton's reelection image revision demonstrates the ability of public individuals
to create several personas which mask dieir true nature, making it more difficult
for voters to determine who a person is, what they believe in, and what they stand
for.
Clinton's image transformation also points to the difficulty of balancing
different personas at the same time, as was the case with Monica Lewinsky. The
Lewinsky scandal began to split the images of die public and private Bill Clinton
wide open. The personal approach that had carried Clinton for six and a half
years would no longer work as Clinton faced questions about his relationship with
the White House intern. Forced to switch gears, Clinton began to cultivate an
image of a president acting as President, while seriously brooding the scandal
privately. Clinton's appearances became more carefully, and obviously, scripted
and timed.
According to Walsh (1998), Clinton's aides claimed that the president was not
distracted by the scandal, despite abundant signs to the contrary. As the scandal
progressed from the grand jury testimonies to the Senate Impeachment, Clinton's
nonverbal behavior began to suggest more and more that he was indeed deeply

The New Jersey Journal of Communication, Volume 7, No. 2, Fall 1999

Downloaded by [University of Bucharest ] at 10:08 19 March 2015

194 Maureen C. Minielli

affected by the unfolding events, despite the carefully constructed public image
designed to indicate that nothing was wrong (Gibbs & Duffy, 1998). According
to one British source in January 1998, Clinton appeared angry, tired and almost
desperate, perspiring, speaking in a throaty voice and at times, trembling
("European press says Clinton stakes sharply raised," 1998).
By the time Clinton gave his ill-fated speech to the nation in August 1998 after
reports of the president acting angrily evasive (Fineman & Hosenball, 1998) in
his Grand Jury testimony, Clinton's split personality became abundantly evident
(Harris, 1998). Analysts like Noonan (1998), former speech writer for Presidents
Reagan and Bush, commented that Clinton's speech was a disaster, failing to elicit
sympathy, and depicting the president as weak, uninspiring, graceless and
begrudging.
Further reports emphasized the presidential personality split. In public, Clinton
strove for a president at work image, meeting for long hours with his staff,
discussing issues like education, social security, healthcare and the budget
(Fineman & Rosenberg, 1999, p. 38). Privately, Clinton was feeling the deep
freeze from his wife Hillary, and was becoming more and more angry with his
staff as much as he was with Starr and his investigation team.
When it became apparent that the articles of impeachment would go no further
than the Senate, Clinton began to relax a little, and indulge in a renewed optimism
that the entire impeachment event was nothing more than a partisan exercise
(Garrett & Walsh, 1999). Clinton also resurrected the personal presidential
approach to communication that had been so successful for him in the past. Walsh
and Gerson (1998) reported that the Clinton game plan was to have the president
carry on as usual, showing he is on top of his job and in tune with everyday
Americans.
Nine months after the Lewinsky scandal began Clinton held his first news
conference, an event that one New York Times editorialist labeled as one of a
"president reemerging" ("A president re-emerges," 1999, p. A26). Clinton was
described as relaxed and genial, but still testy when asked about the Lewinsky
scandal. Despite attempts to reconcile his public and private personas, Clinton's
reaction suggests that reconciliation may not occur anytime soon.
Clinton's image problems, highlighted through the Lewinsky scandal, leads to
several conclusions. First, it supports the notion that when verbal and nonverbal
messages differ, the nonverbal messages are apt to be believed over their verbal
counterparts. Second, it suggests that in times of strife, the ability to maintain
different personas becomes more difficult, if not impossible, to sustain. Third, it
demonstrates the importance of nonverbal communication when examining
political figures and their messages. To focus solely on individual words, without
consideration for those nonverbal elements that provide a context and suggest a

The New Jersey Journal of Communication, Volume 7, No. 2, Fall 1999

The Nonverbal Communication of President Bill Clinton 195

meaning, are to ignore an aspect of oral communication that clearly needs to be

included.

Downloaded by [University of Bucharest ] at 10:08 19 March 2015

Clinton and Froxemics

According to Hall (1966), there are four distance zones of space (intimate,
personal, social, and public) that serve as an extension of an individual's
personality. Hall argued that "man's sense of space is closely related to his sense
of self, which is an intimate transaction with his environment. Man can be viewed
as having visual, kinesthetic, tactile, and thermal aspects of his self which may
be either inhibited or encouraged to develop by his environment" (p. 60).
Aldiough the study of space, or proxemics, as Hall called it, has been almost
nonexistent in political communication scholarship, it can prove insightful here.
On a public level, Clinton's use of space centers on surrounding himself with
aesthetically pleasing pictures and background trappings. Like the presidents
before him, Clinton couched himself in traditional American and presidential
symbols when viewed in public. As a presidential candidate, Clinton displayed the
use of typical patriotic trappings by being seen with with uniformed soldiers or
in front of resplendent American flags (Walsh, 1996). As president, Clinton used
physical space to his advantage, emphasizing presidential initiatives with
nonverbal settings. For example, when Clinton created the 1.7 million dollar
Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in south central Utah, he signed
the legislation using the Utah landscape as his backdrop (Walsh, 1997). The
impact of the legislation signing would not have as dramatic had it not been for
the scenic background behind him.
Unfortunately, Clinton's quick ability to master public physical space did not
match his slower ability to master personal physical space. Scholars and
journalists alike have documented the almost chaotic lifestyle of the Clinton
administration, including a chronically undisciplined Clinton whom Chief of Staff
Erskine Bowles eventually managed to get on a regular schedule prior to his
departure (Dunham & Walczak, 1998). With the constant chaos meeting Clinton
head on, his advisors decided in 1994 that several changes had to be made. One
major change concerned his personal and public use of physical space.
Clinton's use of the White House provides a fruitful example. For the first two
years in office, Clinton held many public meetings in the Oval Office. These
situations found Clinton conversing much longer than was necessary, causing him
to be late to other meetings. Although it was Clinton's ability to listen and
converse with the common American that got him elected, it was also the main
cause of his administration's faltering during his first presidential term.

The New Jersey Journal of Communication, Volume 7, No. 2, Fall 1999

Downloaded by [University of Bucharest ] at 10:08 19 March 2015

196 Maureen C. Minielli

The solution was to switch the meetings to different parts of the White House.
As Duffy (1994, p. 26) commented, Clinton's aides "moved many of his public
events out of the Oval Office and the Roosevelt Room, where he was inclined
toward harmful kibitzing, and into more formal settings in the East Room and
Rose Garden. 'When he stands up,' noted an official, 'he's more careful about
what he says. When he sits down, he just talks more."'
Another example is Clinton's penchant for the Roosevelt Room. On March 24,
1993, Dan Rather interviewed Clinton for the television program 48 Hours, and
on July 15, 1996, Tom Brokaw of MSNBC interviewed Clinton. On both
occasions, Rather and Brokaw began their respective interviews commenting on
the Roosevelt Room. In turn, Clinton responded, stating himself that he felt there
was a lot of history and prestige associated with it. He clearly looked comfortable
in the Roosevelt room.
Perhaps that liking and comfort for the Roosevelt room could explain in part the
disastrous Grand Jury testimony and ill-fated speech of August 17, 1998, both of
which occurred from the Map Room in the White House. Traditionally, the Map
Room had been used by many of Clinton's predecessors to make momentous
decisions. With this knowledge in mind, Clinton could have unwittingly damaged
his psyche when giving his Grand Jury testimony.
When Clinton friend Harry Thomason rearranged the Map Room for Clinton's
speech later that evening, the added emphasis of change could have thrown off
Clinton's tempo and demeanor even more. According to Thomas and Cooper
(1998), Thomason wanted a fire-side chat look, reminiscent of FDR. Instead of
flags, a vase full of flowers was used. Notably absent from the scene were
pictures of Clinton's family, and in particular, Hillary. Uncomfortable in less
familiar surroundings, with a backdrop purposely non-presidential, Clinton may
have undermined his attempts to apologize to the American people for lying even
more so beyond the words he used when he spoke on national television. Given
that the majority of Clinton's speech focused on attacking Independent Counsel
Kenneth Starr, matching a predominantly presidential-sounding speech with a
non-presidential setting may have aided the diffused reaction to both the testimony
and the speech.
Throughout the scandal, Clinton's handlers attempted to use space to
strategically divert public attention away from the scandal. Gibbs (1998) reported
that the Clinton game plan for the Spring of 1998 was to get him out of the
country and to give the American public as many glimpses of Clinton looking
presidential as possible. Clinton's journeys included trips to Africa, South
America, Britain and China.
Clinton's use of space supports Hall's argument that physical space influences
communication. It suggests that Clinton has created his public and personal

The New Jersey Journal of Communication, Volume 7, No. 2, Fall 1999

Downloaded by [University of Bucharest ] at 10:08 19 March 2015

The Nonverbal Communication of President Bill Clinton 197

persona partially based on his surroundings, and that his comfort and confidence
levels can be linked with his use of space. Ironically, Clinton's use of space takes
on a decidedly darker meaning when one examines where his dalliances with
Monica Lewinsky took place. It has been well publicized that their dalliances
occurred in a windowless hallway and bathroom off the Oval Office. Steps
Clinton took to ensure some privacy with Lewinsky, including the avoidance of
windows, and leaving the hallway door ajar several inches, suggest an
overlapping and perhaps ill-conceived use of public and private space for the illicit
affair. It also suggests Clinton's inability to separate public space from private
space because of the very nature of his role as President.
Clinton and Paralanguage
Jamieson (1988) argued that the conversational approach to oratory began with
President Franklin D. Roosevelt and his fireside chats. Conversing over radio
with millions of Americans, Jamieson claims that the fiery, forceful oratory of
years past had been replaced with a more informal, conversational style. Oratory
evolved into public address, orators evolved into speakers, and the public in
public oratory became more private. The availability of mass media, at this time
radio, allowed for a more intimate environment to be created. As television and
computers join the fray, the ability to carry on intimate conversations has
increased tremendously.
For much of his presidency Clinton followed in the footsteps of FDR. Watson
(1993) noted that part of Clinton's success with the personal strategy stemmed
from his skills with paralanguage: "He is an eloquent public speaker who
appreciates the power of language and is not afraid to use it. He often speaks with
passion and is comfortable expressing emotion" (p. 431). Gelderman (1997) also
noted that Clinton is well versed in the use of language, not only of word choice,
but also of rhythm and cadence as well. Quoting one of Clinton's speech writers,
Gelderman stated Clinton was well acquainted with the "basic texts of American
oratory, " including the speeches of Jefferson, Lincoln, FDR and Kennedy.
Clinton is also familiar with Shakespeare and the Bible, which is how he knows
the right rhythms and cadences for any audience he addresses (p. 159).
Empathy has played a significant role in Clinton's personal style. Although
empathic before, his use of this strategy crystallized during the 1996 campaign.
Drew (1994) argued that Clinton's ability to empathize with the American public
eventually became one of his presidential calling cards:
People told him their problems and he would bite his lip; occasionally a tear
would appear. He would express his sympathy with their plight - and then spell

The New Jersey Journal of Communication, Volume 7, No. 2, Fall 1999

198 Maureen C. Minielli

Downloaded by [University of Bucharest ] at 10:08 19 March 2015

out some program he had proposed that would deal with it. Clinton's empathy,
actual or feigned, became one of his trademarks" (p. 95).

The ability of Clinton to orate and listen well suggests that Goffman (1963) was
correct when he suggested that actors often engage in different scenes to solicit
a favorable response from their listeners. It also leads to the conclusion that
Clinton is more of a manipulator of his own feelings, acts, and overall image than
perhaps originally thought. Clinton's ability to know how to look, how to sound,
and how to act, points more to a more carefully thought out, preplanned, and
sophisticated manipulation level designed to support his carefully crafted image.
It is also apparent that Clinton does not know how to maintain that image level
when confronted with serious personal and public problems. For example, the
Lewinsky scandal not only showed a completely different side of the "private"
Clinton, it also illuminated his inability to maintain his public and private
personae when events force him to deviate from his established image.
According to Morton (1999), Lewinsky saw a different side of Clinton based
on her intimacy with him. Lewinsky stated her "Handsome," her nickname for
him, "has a glow about him that is magnetic. He exudes a sexual energy" (p. 57).
She also claims they were "sexual soulmates" (p. 65). She described Clinton
during their first hug as possessing a "softness and tenderness about him, his eyes
were very soul-searching, very wanting, very needing and very loving" (p. 63).
Lewinsky claims that she got to know "the man behind the public mask, a flawed
figure riddled with doubt and wrestling with guilt, yet emotionally needy,
vulnerable and ultimately alone" (p. 83).
As the scandal progressed, more information about Clinton and his private
actions became public. Clinton became noticeably quiet, under the guise that he
could not comment because of legal ramifications. Nonverbally, though, the
scandal and impeachment hearings brought out a chaotic, inconsistent, and
borderline schizophrenic Bill Clinton. Alter (1998) characterized Clinton in an
adaptation of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde into Dr. Clinton and Mr. Bill. The flipflopping image of Clinton ranged from relaxed and upbeat to tired and unfocused.
In an April 1998 speech at Perm Valley Community College, Clinton was
described as weary and tired looking, downing Cokes to keep himself charged up
(Fineman, 1998a). Yet in an August Rose Garden speech, Clinton appeared
relaxed, but later looked tired at a dinner for Irish-Americans Democrats
(Fineman & Breslau, 1998).
Apparently the Lewinsky scandal was more problematic for Clinton than he let
on. How much it affected him, though, is subject to interpretation. Even the socalled experts, who were more than willing to offer analysis on the who, what,
where, when and why of Clinton, did not always agree with their respective
interpretations. For example, contradictory reports of his August 17th Grand Jury
The New Jersey Journal of Communication, Volume 7, No. 2, Fall 1999

Downloaded by [University of Bucharest ] at 10:08 19 March 2015

The Nonverbal Communication of President Bill Clinton 199

testimony prevent an accurate description of Clinton's nonverbal communication

usage. Some analysts described Clinton as angry and evasive in his Grand Jury
testimony, ducking and dodging and at times turning purple with rage (Thomas
& Isikoff, 1998). On the other hand, the Economist of September 26, 1998 stated
that Clinton "managed to avoid looking terrible in the tragicomedy called Monica"
and that "he played his part in the Grand Jury testimony expertly" ("It wasn't the
climax after all," 1998, p. 26).
In his nationally televised speech later that evening, Americans saw a "grim"
(Bennet, 1998), "grudging" (Gergen, 1998), Clinton, "tired" and "brimming with
sullen anger" (Noonan, 1998). On the other hand, some thought there was some
genuine emotion heard in Clinton's voice, especially in the early parts of the
speech (Myers, 1998). Noonan (1998) thought that Clinton had dropped his
presidential mask, and for the first time the real Bill Clinton was being seen.
Overall media accounts of Clinton's performances varied, presenting a continually
confusing Bill Clinton presence.
This dichotomy points to the different factors that allow individuals to create
personal interpretations when observing other individual's nonverbal
communication. Those factors include background, ideology, belief system,
attitude, and general disposition toward a subject. This dichotomy also suggests
that observation and interpretations of nonverbal behavior are highly subjective,
and are conditioned on who is doing the observing and interpreting. In addition,
it points out the blatant subjectivity of the so-called experts, calling into question
their own expertise and knowledge based on their conflicting descriptions of
Clinton.
Clinton's chameleon image and the expert's interpretation of it were probably
best illustrated at a September 11, 1998, prayer meeting. A remorseful Clinton
delivered a "tearful apology" (Keifer, 1998) that appeared genuine. The
September 19th, 1998 Economist reported though that "at the breakfast, the
cameras caught him peeking around in the middle of his prayers, as if to check
that everyone was watching" ("Just go," 1998, p. 19). The Economist concluded
that "this is a consummate politician who knows exactly what strings, including
heartstrings, he must pull to stay in office" ("Just go," 1998, p. 19). Fineman
(1998b) claimed that this is Bill Clinton as Bill Clinton wants you to see him,
suggesting that the president is a chameleon when it comes to portraying himself
as if strategy were important to helping him keep his job than genuine remorse.
The use of tears and eye contact is intriguing, and warrants further analysis.
For example, Jenkins (1997) cynically analyzed the use of tears as a political
campaign strategy. In 1996, both Clinton and Dole were seen with tears in their
eyes at different points in their respective candidacies. These tears, according to
Jenkins, were used to humanize the presidential candidates. The Clinton use of

The New Jersey Journal of Communication, Volume 7, No. 2, Fall 1999

Downloaded by [University of Bucharest ] at 10:08 19 March 2015

200 Maureen C. Minielli

tears had elevated it to a new level in the political arena: it wasn't necessary, real
or voluntary, it was a campaign strategy designed to win over listeners and gain
their votes. According to Jenkins (1997), Clinton's tears were tears of empathy:
"Humbly, he weeps not for himself but for the suffering voter" (p. 8). As with
Dole, tears were used as signifiers of sincerity, serving "to overcome the obstacle
of words" (p. 8). Clinton, voluntarily or involuntarily, used tears to identify with
his listeners, indicating that the problems they faced were no-match for any words
Clinton could offer. Strategic or not, Jenkins argues that weeping had an effective
appeal about it that Americans embraced, not only in the 1996 election, but also
in his September 11th prayer breakfast meeting.
The use of eye contact also appears to be an often-used strategic Clinton tool,
albeit not always discretely. Woodward (1996) claimed that Clinton, despite
despising Washington social engagements, is a charismatic and attentive
communicator: "He would stop in hallways to talk socially with people for 20
minutes or more. He was gracious, engaging, and patient, masterfully making and
holding eye contact. Unlike many politicians, his eyes did not dart around a room
to see who else of more importance was there" (p. 102).
Clinton's success with this nonverbal approach continued during the 1996
presidential debates (Hardy and Doming, 1996). As in 1992, Clinton moved
closer to his audience while addressing them, and used eye contact while he
spoke. This personal touch, moving closer to the audience, holding eye contact,
working the crowd, was Clinton's best communication approach.
This strategy may have worked in 1992, but it apparently didn't work at the
September l l * prayer meeting. All introductory public speaking courses
emphasize that when verbal and nonverbal communication conflict, the nonverbal
is believed more than the verbal. Such is the case with the peeking Clinton. No
matter how humble he sounded, or how tearfully apologetic he appeared visually,
the act of looking around to see if he was being listened to contradicted everything
he was trying to accomplish at that moment. It is as if Clinton becomes his own
worst enemy, getting himself ahead before undermining his own efforts and
falling back.
The September 11th prayer meeting not only highlights' Clinton's skillful ability
to craft an image based on his audience and surroundings, it also points to
Clinton's skillful ability to manipulate a situation to his own advantage. It reflects
a Clinton who appears to be sympathetic and understanding, but is not always so.
It also explains Clinton's apparent inability to be the consistent master of his
image domain. It is clear that Clinton has mastered the ability to manipulate his
image in some, but not all, situations. In some instances, Clinton has the upper
hand, carefully crafting his image based on familiar surroundings and roles he is
used to playing. Other instances though clearly demonstrate a troubled Clinton,

The New Jersey Journal of Communication, Volume 7, No. 2, Fall 1999

The Nonverbal Communication of President Bill Clinton 201

unable to devise a winning persona that hides his discomfort level and inability to
create a convincing, believable image.

Downloaded by [University of Bucharest ] at 10:08 19 March 2015

Clinton and Artifactual Communication

Clothing and personal adornment has not been in the forefront of scholar's
minds when investigating political and presidential rhetoric, at least not until the
Lewinsky scandal. Sporadic attention had been devoted to the issue of artifactual
communication, with the noted exception of media reports describing President
Ronald Reagan's penchant for calling on female reporters wearing the color red,
prompting scores of female journalists to also begin wearing red. For a younger
presidential candidate though, clothing could be a subtle way of attracting
attention and creating persuasive appeal, or become a sticking point for an older,
incumbent president fighting to keep his job.
Numerous essays have documented Clinton's earlier appeals to the younger
generation, especially during the 1992 presidential campaign. This appeal to youth
even found its way to Clinton's first inaugural ceremony. Commenting on
personal reflection, Rose (1997) noted that the crowd at the first inaugural was
"markedly younger (perhaps 'thirty-something'), more ethnically diverse, and
certainly more casual in appearance and demeanor" (p. 1). Their appearance
probably can be attributed to the candidate they had met and could identify with
during the presidential campaign. As Wayne (1996) pointed out, younger persons
could relate to the sun-glassed, saxophone-toting Clinton candidate more so than
the older, more stately Bush candidate. They felt that Clinton understood their
problems, was sincerely concerned about them, and could empathize with their
situation (p. 231). The strategy of a young, swinger-type image clearly worked
to Clinton's advantage during the 1992 presidential campaign.
Clinton continued his casual clothing approach throughout his first term. This
approach emphasized the personal touch Clinton brought to the presidency. Tom
Julian of the Fashion Association stated: "Clinton is showing that you can loosen
up, wear a softly constructed suit with no vents, beesom pockets, low-notched
lapel, and feel good in it. The guy has a very strong presence when you're
looking at him in a sea of traditionally cut blue suits" (Cohen, 1994).
Not all of Clinton's clothing attire worked to his advantage, though. As Vogue's
Talbot (1996) pointed out, Clinton's handlers finally convinced him to stop
wearing shorts while jogging in public. The problem? "His unmastered thighs"
(p. 490). Talbot suggests that despite being physically active, one look at
Clinton's body would make one think twice about seeing the President as an
athlete. Wittily, Talbot explains the extent of Clinton's personal style in terms of
the body and its impact on the American public:

The New Jersey Journal of Communication, Volume 7, No. 2, Fall 1999

202 Maureen C. Minielli

Downloaded by [University of Bucharest ] at 10:08 19 March 2015

His [Clinton] is the Everyman body for the olestra age, an era in which
Americans grow steadily fatter as they grow steadily more fat-conscious. But
therein lies a political problem: Tall, and in the right light, handsome though
he is, Clinton looks too much like the rest of us, locked into our pattern of pigouts followed by punitive redemption on the Exercycle, followed by more pigouts. A White House aide told The New York Times Magazine, "Every
American can see a part of himself in this president. It's unsettling. They don't
like to be confronted with their faults" (p. 490).

By 1996, Clinton would adopt a different approach. Gone were the sunglasses,
the jogging shorts, and the youthful-appealing appearance. After serving as
President for over three years, Clinton could not rely on his 1992 image. He
needed to appear more presidential, statelier, more Bush-like. In addition to
changing the physical props used to frame Clinton in televised speeches, Morris
(1997) changed Clinton's clothing style to one consisting of "bright-red power ties
and navy suits" (p. 182), creating the image of an older and wiser president.
Gernd Schmitt, a consumer behavior specialist and associate professor of
business at Columbia University, argued that Clinton's clothing approach was
representative of a broader democratization of fashion that has been occurring
throughout the twentieth century, and a decreasing emphasis placed on clothing
to indicate social status and formality (Cohen, 1994). Clinton, as president, is
expressing and reinforcing that trend. Time magazine ran a humorous pictorial of
different Clinton ties in its March 14th issue. States the headline: "Is President
Clinton's taste in ties as precarious as his managerial style? You be the judge"
("At least they don't light up," 1994, p. 22).
Ironically, the issue of ties served as another questionable point with Clinton
during the Lewinsky scandal. Lewinsky states that she was great with neckties,
selling them during her college days (Morton, 1999, p. 67). Investigators found
Clinton to have worn some of Lewinsky's ties and speculated if Clinton was using
the ties as a way of communicating nonverbally with Lewinsky. As Thomas and
Cooper (1998) reported, Clinton was asked about the tie he wore the day
Lewinsky gave her Grand Jury testimony, a tie Lewinsky had given the president.
It was speculated that Clinton was sending nonverbal messages to Lewinsky via
the tie. Clinton responded that idea was preposterous, but given how acutely
aware Clinton is about message presentation, it is not so far-fetched an idea that
Clinton may indeed have been using his ties in a strategic nonverbal manner. It
also suggests that Clinton may have trapped himself in a situation that he could
not explain because his nonverbal intentions conflicted with the verbal intentions
he was suggesting. This situation caused Clinton to lose his grasp on his image,
and forced him to quickly seek a different approach in joining and presenting his
different personas during the Lewinsky scandal.

The New Jersey Journal of Communication, Volume 7, No. 2, Fall 1999

Downloaded by [University of Bucharest ] at 10:08 19 March 2015

The Nonverbal Communication of President Bill Clinton 203

The use of clothing and other artifacts suggests that Clinton not only is aware
of how such objects influence how he is perceived, but also that they can also be
carefully manipulated into creating a persona that is appealing to his constituents.
It suggests the Clinton understood the power of nonverbal elements like clothing,
eye contact, tears, and space, and how these elements can be combined to artfully
convey, or fail to convey, a carefully constructed image. An individual's ability
to sustain and carry those elements also aids in the success or failure of image
creation and maintenance. Clinton appears to have the ability to be successful in
certain situations in which he is familiar with his image and feels confident in his
skill level to pull off the appearance he wants to portray. In other instances like
the Lewinsky scandal, it appears that Clinton is not capable of adapting to all
situations, and this inability to do so becomes more prominently displayed in his
sometimes-wavering use of nonverbal communication.
Conclusion
Based on this analysis of President Bill Clinton's nonverbal communication, it
can be concluded that the president was on a relatively clear but changeable path
of using and refining his nonverbal usage until the Lewinsky scandal became
public. Using the personalized presidential strategy for almost six years as
President, Clinton was suddenly forced to alter his communication strategy during
the Lewinsky scandal and subsequent Impeachment hearings to a strategy of
divorcing his public presidential appearance from his private one. This sudden
divorce proved to be chaotic for Clinton, as he alternated between being
unaffected and affected by the recent events. His use of space, paralanguage and
artifactual communication reinforced even more a President desperately trying to
keep his head above water as his fate was being publicly decided. Even at the best
of times, Clinton appears to have been his own worst enemy during the scandal
and impeachment hearings, attempting to move forward but ultimately falling
back because of his ill-conceived communication strategies.
Post-hearings indicate a Clinton trying to get back on course, and finish out his
last term without any more regrettable incidents. His most recent State of the
Union address was not as spectacular as his 1997 speech, but it showed a Clinton
determined to focus on the needs of the country. According to Borger (1998),
Clinton's State of the Union also marked a return to his personal style as
president, noting that this address has more of a personal touch than previous
speeches. Alter (1998) claimed that Clinton showed none of the heat he had been
feeling for the past year and despite appearing strained at times, his speech turned
out well, driving his public opinion poll ratings to record levels. At this point in
time, one can only speculate as to how his last term as president will finish out.

The New Jersey Journal of Communication, Volume 7, No. 2, Fall 1999

204 Maureen C. Minielli

Downloaded by [University of Bucharest ] at 10:08 19 March 2015

Clearly, more scholarly attention on nonverbal communication and political

communication is warranted. This essay urges political scholars to take up the
challenge and examine further the use of nonverbal communication in American
politics.
References
A president re-emerges. (1999, March 20). New York Times, p. A26.
Alter, J. (1998, August 24). The two Mr. Clintons. Newsweek, pp. 20-24.
At least they don't light up: Bill Clinton's neckties. (1994, March 14). Time, p. 22.
Bennet, J. (1998, August 23). For Clinton, the past 2 weeks reflect his split personality. Indianapolis
Star, p. A11.
Birdwhistell, R. (1952). Introduction to kinesics. Louisville, KY: University of Louisville Press.
Birdwhistell, R. (1970). Kinesics and context. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Borger, G. (1996, November 18). Fresh Start. U.S. News and World Report, pp. 22-24.
Borger, G. (1999, February 1). Killing us with kindness. U.S. News and World Report, p. 32.
Burgoon, J. (1985). Nonverbal signals. In M. L. Knapp and G. L. Miller (Eds.), Handbook of
Nonverbal Communication. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Cohen, J. (1994, May). What to wear: A look into the future of fashion. Omni, p. 18.
Drew, E. (1994). On the edge. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
Duffy, M. (1994, February 7). The state of Bill Clinton. Time, pp. 24-30.
Dunham, R. & Walczak, L. (1998, November 9). Mr. Bowles leaves Washington. Business Week,
pp. 144, 146.
European press says Clinton stakes sharply raised. (1998, January 27). Reuters.
Edelman, M. (1971). Politics as symbolic action. Chicago, IL: Markham.
Fineman, H. (1998a, April 20). Bill's social security schmooze. Newsweek, p. 26.
Fineman, H. (1998b, September 21). I have sinned. Newsweek, pp. 27-36.
Fineman, H. & Breslau, K. (1998, August 10). What will he say? Newsweek, pp. 22-26.
Fineman, H. & Hosenball, M. (1998, September 28). Out of control. Newsweek, pp. 34-38.
Fineman, H. & Rosenberg, D. (1999, January 4). Washington at war. Newsweek, pp. 34-36, 38.
Garrett, M. & K. Walsh. (1999, January 11). Clinton on trial. US News and World Report, pp. 20-24.
Gelderman, C. (1997). All the presidents words. New York, NY: Walker.
Gergen, D. (1998, August 31). Can he save his presidency? U.S. News and World Report, p. 36.
Gibbs. N. (1998, March 30). Outrageous fortune. Time, pp. 21-25.
Gibbs, N. & Duffy, M. (1998, August 17). Over to you, Bill. Time, pp. 24-29.
Goffman, E. (1963). Behavior in public places. New York, NY: Free Press.
Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face Behavior. Garden City, NY:
Doubleday.
Goffman, E. (1969). Strategic interaction. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
Hall. E.T. (1966). The hidden dimension. New York, NY: Random House.
Hardy, T. & Doming, M. (1996, October 17). President stresses his record. Chicago Tribune, p. 1,
12.
Harris, J. F. (1998, August 17). Like mother, like son: the show must go on. Washington Post
National Weekly Edition, p. 15.
It wasn't the climax after all. (1998, September 26). The Economist, p. 26.
Jamieson, K. H. (1998). Eloquence in an electronic age. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Jenkins, N. (1997). Veil of tears. The New Yorker, 72, pp. pp. 7-8.
Just go. (1998, September 19). The Economist, pp. 19-20.

The New Jersey Journal of Communication, Volume 7, No. 2, Fall 1999

Downloaded by [University of Bucharest ] at 10:08 19 March 2015

The Nonverbal Communication of President Bill Clinton 205

Keifer, F. (1998, September 22). Impact of democracy by video. Christian Science Monitor, pp. 1,
10.
Kendall, K.E. (1995). The problems of beginnings in New Hampshire. In K.E. Kendall (Ed.),
Presidential campaign discourse. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Knapp, M. (1978). Nonverbal communication in human interaction. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart
and Winston.
Let's get presidential. (1994, June 27), Time, p. 20.
McGrory, M. (1997, January 20). On his date with history, Clinton must decide how to make an
impression. Washington Post. p. A9.
Morris, D. (1997). Behind the oval office, New York, NY: Random House.
Morton, A. (1999). Monica's story. New York, NY: St. Martin's.
Myers, D. D. (1998, August 31). That's where he lost me. Time, p. 40.
Neikirk, W. (1997, January 20). The Changing American Presidency. Chicago Tribune, p. 1.
Noonan, P. (1998, August 31). Why the speech will live in infamy. Time, p. 36.
Novak, J. (1997). Hope spring eternal. American Behavioral Scientist, 40, 1048-1057.
Rose, G. L. (1997). The American presidency under siege, Albany, NY: State University of New
York Press.
Talbot, M. (1996). Keeping up appearances. Vogue, pp. 490, 492, 494.
Thomas, E. & Cooper, M. (1998, August 31). Extracting a confession. Newsweek, pp. 31-37.
Thomas, E. & Isikoff, M. (1998, September 28). Tale of the tape. Newsweek, pp. pp. 40-43.
Trent, J. D. and Trent, J. S. (1995). The incumbent and his challengers. In K. E. Kendall (Ed.).
Presidential Campaign Discourse, Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Walsh, K. T. (1996, November 4). On the brink. U.S. News and World Report, pp. 20-27.
Walsh, K. T. (1997, September 8). Is he Clinton's real legacy? U.S. News and World Report, pp. 2224, 26.
Walsh, K. T. (1998, October 19). A fight to the finish. US News and World Report, pp. 19-22.
Walsh, K. T. & Gerson, M.J. (1999, January 18). In the dock of history. U.S. News and World
Report, 16-19.
Watson, J. H., Jr. (1993). The Clinton white house. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 23, 429-435.
Wayne, S. J. (1996). The road to the white house 1996, New York, NY: St. Martin's.
Woodward, B. (1996). The choice. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.

The New Jersey Journal of Communication, Volume 7, No. 2, Fall 1999