Introduction
Jason Myles’s article “The Line Between Politics and Pro Wrestling Has Disappeared” argues that Donald Trump has helped turn politics into a kind of performance that closely resembles professional wrestling. In this style of politics, conflict is exaggerated, emotions are heightened, and audiences are encouraged to treat the spectacle as real even when the truth is unstable. The wrestling concept of kayfabe helps explain this dynamic. Kayfabe refers to the shared agreement to treat a performance as real within its own world. This argument can be better understood using James W. Carey’s two logics of communication, transmission and ritual, along with Leanne Betasamosake Simpson’s concept of sintering. Carey’s ideas help explain how political spectacle operates through control and shared participation, while Simpson’s concept helps explain how social bonds either strengthen or fracture under pressure. Together, these concepts show that kayfabe politics is not only about misinformation, but about power operating through culture, participation, and collective meaning.
Communication as Transmission
Carey’s transmission view of communication treats communication as the sending of messages across space in order to influence or control others. In this model, communication is successful when messages spread quickly, reach large audiences, and produce predictable reactions such as fear, loyalty, or outrage. This view is closely tied to modern media systems that prioritize speed, repetition, and visibility.
The article shows this logic clearly in Trump’s use of media. Trump’s political style relies on simplified narratives of heroes and enemies that are easy to repeat across social media, cable news, and online commentary. Like a wrestling promo, his statements are not meant to explain policy or provide evidence. Instead, they are designed to grab attention, provoke reaction, and dominate the news cycle. Even negative coverage becomes useful because it keeps him at the center of public attention.
This form of communication is also tied to power. When messages spread quickly and repeatedly, they can shape what feels normal or acceptable. The article describes how migrants are framed using dehumanizing language, turning cruelty into part of the spectacle. Transmission communication here does not depend on truth. It depends on reach, repetition, and the ability to define the story that others must respond to.
Communication as Ritual
Carey’s ritual view of communication focuses less on sending information and more on creating shared meaning over time. Ritual communication brings people together around symbols, stories, and repeated performances that reinforce group identity and belonging. In this view, communication works by maintaining a shared world rather than by delivering new facts.
Kayfabe politics fits this ritual logic. Just as wrestling fans know matches are staged but still invest emotionally, political audiences can remain committed even when they doubt the truth of what they are seeing. The performance itself becomes meaningful. Participation matters more than accuracy. The article describes this as “neokayfabe,” where people expect manipulation but continue searching for what feels real to them. This helps explain why scandals do not necessarily weaken Trump’s support. Within a ritual framework, scandals become part of the ongoing story rather than moments of disqualification. They produce shared outrage, shared defence, and public displays of loyalty. From Carey’s perspective, this makes sense because ritual communication is about sustaining belief and identity over time. Politics becomes part of culture, with familiar actions, symbols, and shared emotions.
Simpson’s Concept of Sintering
Leanne Betasamosake Simpson’s concept of sintering offers a different way to think about political community. Simpson describes sintering as a process where individual elements bond together to form something stronger. It emphasizes relationship building, care, and durability rather than spectacle or short-term intensity. This concept helps clarify what kayfabe politics prevents. Kayfabe thrives when people remain isolated audiences who react emotionally but do not form lasting coalitions. Constant conflict and manufactured feuds keep people engaged, but they also discourage trust and cooperation. In this sense, spectacle works against sintering by keeping communities divided and reactive.
Simpson’s framework suggests that meaningful political change depends on durable relationships rather than dramatic performances. The article hints at this by suggesting that spectacle cannot be challenged through fact-checking alone, but through material improvements that change lived experience. This aligns with sintering because strong coalitions are built through shared work, mutual support, and practices that last beyond moments of outrage.
Conclusion
Using Carey and Simpson together shows that the article is not simply criticizing lies or media sensationalism. It describes a system where communication operates as both transmission and ritual, using spectacle to control attention while also drawing people into a shared performance. Kayfabe politics is powerful because it is cultural, emotional, and repeated, allowing it to survive even when facts are contested. Simpson’s concept of sintering helps point toward what can weaken this system. When spectacle thrives on division and nonstop reaction, building long-term relationships reduces its influence. The key communication question raised by the article is not only what messages are being sent, but what kinds of communities those messages are creating over time, and whether people are being shaped into active publics or passive audiences.
References
Carey, James W. (2009). A cultural approach to communication (pp. 13–23). In Communication as Culture (Revised ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203928912-9
Myles, J. (2026, January 26). The line between politics and pro wrestling has disappeared. Current Affairs. https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/donald-trump-is-a-pro-wrestling-villain
Simpson, Leanne Betasamosake. (2025). Theory of water: Nishnaabe maps to the times ahead. Haymarket Books.
I hope it’s okay that I’m commenting under my own blog post, but after seeing Donald Trump’s tweet about the Super Bowl halftime show, I just wanted to add something. Trump called Bad Bunny’s performance “absolutely terrible” and even said it was “an affront to the Greatness of America,” sparking intense public reaction on social media and in traditional news outlets.
ReplyDeleteTo me, this feels like a perfect example of the kind of kayfabe politics I discussed above, where a public figure uses cultural moments not to engage in substantive discussion, but to create spectacle, grab attention, and provoke emotional reactions. Rather than commenting on policy or offering a reasoned critique, the tweet functions much like a wrestling promo: it simplifies, polarizes, and keeps audiences talking. It shows how political communication now spills into even entertainment events, turning them into arenas for performance and conflict rather than shared cultural experiences. (And yes, that’s exactly the kind of dynamic I was trying to describe in this post!)
I had the exact same reaction when I saw that tweet. Your comment is such a good example of what you describe in your post, it really shows how these moments get turned into spectacle instead of meaningful discussion. The way you connect it to kayfabe politics feels so real, especially how cultural events like the Super Bowl become arenas for performance, outrage, and attention-grabbing rather than shared experience. I actually mention this same dynamic in my post as well, so it was interesting to see it play out almost immediately in real time. Really strong connection on your part.
ReplyDeleteGreat post! I really like how you used both Carey's transmission and ritual models together with the ideo of kayfabe. Honestly, this concept really confused me, but your post helped clear it up. The way you explained "neokayfabe" made it clearer how political spectacle can function even when audiences are away of manipulation. What really stood out to me is the way you connected ritual communication and how scandals become apart of Trump's identity. This changed my perception of the issue as I kept viewing scandals through a transmission lens, where as seeing it framed through ritual helped me understand why they actually reinforce loyalty to some. Your superbowl example was also a really great because it shows how these dynamics can spill into cultural moments that should have been neutral. Overall, your post had really great connections that helped show how these concepts work in real time.
ReplyDelete