Home Social Sciences Communicating political achievements: a semiotic analysis of political posters in the linguistic landscape of Tanzania
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Communicating political achievements: a semiotic analysis of political posters in the linguistic landscape of Tanzania

  • Paschal Mdukula EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: September 22, 2025

Abstract

In Tanzania, political posters function as strategic communication tools within the linguistic landscape, showcasing leadership achievements and national progress. This study analysed 105 political posters from Dar es Salaam to explore how they communicate the accomplishments of the sixth phase government under President Samia. Guided by social semiotics and framing theories, the research examined how visuals, text, and symbols combine to construct narratives of progress, trust, and legitimacy. The posters employed bold colours, simplified Kiswahili messages, and symbolic imagery to make political achievements relatable and accessible. They highlighted milestones in infrastructure, agriculture, education, healthcare, energy, sports, and tourism, often featuring the President’s portrait to personalise and reinforce the connection between leadership and development. Positioned in high-traffic public areas, these posters saturated the urban landscape with ideologically driven narratives, distinguishing themselves from other forms of political communication such as rallies or television. The study underscores the role of political posters in shaping public perception and national identity through visual discourse. It also contributes to broader discussions on semiotics, political branding, and the linguistic landscape in Tanzania. Future research could investigate public reception and the evolution of political poster strategies in digital spaces.


Corresponding author: Paschal Mdukula, Centre for Communication Studies, University of Dar es Salaam, 35040, Dar es Salaam, 255, United Republic of Tanzania, E-mail:

Acknowledgments

In the development of this article, two artificial intelligence-based tools were employed: (1) ChatGPT-4.0, and Grammarly accessed via textual commands, utilised for spelling correction and language refinement to ensure greater clarity and coherence in the text.

  1. Conflict of interest: The author reported no potential conflict of interest.

  2. Research funding: This work was self-funded.

References

Aiello, G. & K. Parry. 2019. Understanding images in media culture: Methodological considerations in visual communication: Understanding images in media culture, 17–35. SAGE Publications Ltd.10.4135/9781529721522.n2Search in Google Scholar

Blackwood, R. 2021. The linguistic landscape of political campaigns: A comparative study. Journal of Language and Politics 20(2). 1–20.Search in Google Scholar

Burke, P. 2001. Eye witnessing: The uses of images as historical evidence, Reaktion ed. Sage.Search in Google Scholar

Callahan, W. A. 2020. Sensible politics: Visualizing international relations. Oxford: Oxford University.10.1093/oso/9780190071738.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Chandler, D. 2017. Semiotics: The basics, 3rd edn. England, UK: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Creswell, J. W. 2013. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches, 3rd edn. SAGE Publications.Search in Google Scholar

Creswell, J. W. & C. N. Poth. 2018. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches, 4th edn. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.Search in Google Scholar

Curini, L., B. Moffitt & M. Zulianello. 2024. The colours of the populist radical right: The strategic use of hue and saturation in party logos. The International Journal of Press/Politics. 19401612241229216. https://doi.org/10.1177/19401612241229216.Search in Google Scholar

Entman, R. M. 1993. Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication 43(4). 51–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x.Search in Google Scholar

Farkas, X. & M. Bene. 2020. Images, politicians, and social media: Patterns and effects of politicians’ image-based political communication strategies on social media. The International Journal of Press/Politics 26(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161220959553.Search in Google Scholar

Farkas, X., D. Jackson, P. Baranowski, M. Bene, U. Russmann & A. Veneti. 2022. Strikingly similar: Comparing visual political communication of populist and non-populist parties across 28 countries. European Journal of Communication 37(5). 545–562. https://doi.org/10.1177/02673231221082238.Search in Google Scholar

Gakahu, N. 2024. Image-centrism in Africa’s political communication: A social semiotic analysis of self-presentation practices by women political candidates in Kenya’s social media space. Information, Communication & Society 27(8). 1687–1711. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2024.2343367.Search in Google Scholar

Geise, S., A. Heck & D. Panke. 2021. The effects of digital media images on political participation online: Results of an eye-tracking experiment integrating individual perception on photo news factors. Voting Rights and Electoral Processes 13(1). 54–85. https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.235.Search in Google Scholar

Jaworski, A. & C. Thurlow (eds.). 2010. Semiotic landscapes: Language, image, space. Bloomsbury Publishing.Search in Google Scholar

Klincková, J. 2014. Posters as semiotic communication in urban spaces. Journal of Visual Communication 12(2). 75–95.Search in Google Scholar

Kress, G. 2009. Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication, 1st edn. Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Kress, G. & T. van Leeuwen. 2006. Reading images: The grammar of visual design, 3rd edn. Routledge.10.4324/9780203619728Search in Google Scholar

Landry, R. & R. Y. Bourhis. 1997. Linguistic landscape and ethnolinguistic vitality: An empirical study. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 16(1). 23–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X970161002.Search in Google Scholar

Languages of Tanzania Project (LOT). 2009. Atlasi ya lugha za Tanzania. Dar es Salaam: Mradi wa Lugha za Tanzania. Chuo Kikuu cha Dar es Salaam.Search in Google Scholar

Lees-Marshment, J. 2014. Political marketing: Principles and applications. London: Routledge.10.4324/9781315775043Search in Google Scholar

Lilleker, D. 2020. The cognitive approach to understanding visual political communication. Journal of Visual Political Communication 8(1). 3–28. https://doi.org/10.1386/jvpc_00010_2.Search in Google Scholar

Lusekelo, A. 2016. The language of Caricatures in Tanzania’s political landscape: The case of selected Masoud Kipanya’s cartoons. Sanaa Journal Tanzania 1. 22–37.Search in Google Scholar

Mdukula, P. C. 2022. Examining language accessibility in the linguistic landscape of Tanzania: The case of labels on pre-packaged foods and beverages. Journal of Kiswahili 85(2). 144–161.10.56279/jk.v85i1.9Search in Google Scholar

Mensah, K., A. Tayman & Z. T. Musah. 2023. Mapping the formats and significance of signs and meaning in political campaigns in Ghanaian elections. In V. Anastacia (ed.), Visual politics in the global south, 169–191. London: Palgrave Macmillan publications.10.1007/978-3-031-22782-0_8Search in Google Scholar

Moleong, J. Lexy. 2007. Qualitative research methodology, Revised Edition Bandurg: PT Remaja Rosdakarya.Search in Google Scholar

Needham, C. & G. Smith. 2015. Introduction: Political branding. Journal of Political Marketing 14(1–2). 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/15377857.2014.990828.Search in Google Scholar

Parry, K. 2023. The political work of war and conflict images. In D. Lilleker (ed.), Research handbook on visual politics, 345–357. Edward Elgar Publishing.10.4337/9781800376939.00036Search in Google Scholar

Reese, S. D. 2001. Prologue—Framing public life: A bridging model for media research in framing public life: Perspectives on media and our understanding of the social world. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.10.4324/9781410605689Search in Google Scholar

Rose, G. 2016. Visual methodologies: An introduction to researching with visual materials, 4th edn. SAGE.Search in Google Scholar

Scheufele, D. A. & D. Tewksbury. 2007. Framing, agenda setting, and priming: The evolution of three media effects models. Journal of Communication 57(1). 9–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0021-9916.2007.00326.x.Search in Google Scholar

Scollon, R. & S. W. Scollon. 2003. Discourses in place: Language in the material world. Routledge.10.4324/9780203422724Search in Google Scholar

Sloan, L. & A. Quan-Haase. 2017. The sage handbook of social media research methods. Routledge.10.4135/9781473983847Search in Google Scholar

Sulistyowati, R. 2023. Political communication strategy through unique posters: A critical discourse analysis study. SALEE: Study of Applied Linguistics and English Education 4(2). 357–369. https://doi.org/10.35961/salee.v4i2.749.Search in Google Scholar

UN-Habitat. 2010. Citywide action plan for upgrading unplanned and unserviced settlements in Dar es Salaam. United Nations Human Settlements Programme.Search in Google Scholar

van Leeuwen, T. 2005. Introducing social semiotics. Routledge.10.4324/9780203647028Search in Google Scholar

Volli, U. 2003. Semiotic aspects of political science: Political semiotics. In Roland Posner, et al. (eds), semiotics, vol. III, 2919–2926. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110194159-023Search in Google Scholar

Waksma, S. & E. Shohamy. 2016. Negotiating and contesting identities in linguistic landscapes. In R. Blackwood & E. Lanza (eds.), Negotiating and contesting identities in linguistic landscapes. Bloomsbury Publishing Plc.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2025-01-07
Accepted: 2025-07-23
Published Online: 2025-09-22

© 2025 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 7.12.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/mc-2025-0002/pdf?lang=en
Scroll to top button