Media expert classifies "An Elvis of self-PR" - why Trump's Davos appearance is an object lesson
He came, spoke and provoked. Donald Trump turned the WEF 2026 into a stage for his own PR. Communications expert Ferris Bühler sees this as a rhetorical masterstroke - at the cost of credibility.
No time? blue News summarizes for you
- Donald Trump used his WEF 2026 speech as a stage for his own provocative PR and for populist rhetoric instead of dialog, deliberately fragmenting the discourse.
- With emotional messages, simple repetitions and gestures of dominance, he secured maximum attention and controlled events, even in a critical environment.
- Communications expert Ferris Bühler sees Trump's performance as a textbook example of effective brand rhetoric - but with clear limits in terms of credibility and substance.
Donald Trump came to Davos, spoke - and dominated the attention. The US president turned the 2026 World Economic Forum into a stage for his own narrative. Instead of exchange, he relied on provocation, instead of nuances, he focused on clear fronts.
For Swiss communications expert Ferris Bühler, this is no coincidence, but calculated rhetoric. In an interview with blue News, he categorizes the appearance:
What makes Trump's style of appearance so recognizable from a communications perspective?
Ferris Bühler: Trump is a master of brand rhetoric: he uses populist directness, recurring messages and simple formulations that strike an emotional chord with his core target groups. He speaks like a salesman on the street, not like a statesman in an ivory tower, and that is precisely where his recognizability lies. His language is reduced, pointed, often provocative and therefore immediately identifiable in any room. His crisis and conflict frames sit like tattoos on the forehead of the debate. In other words, you can always tell immediately when Trump is speaking, even when he is silent.
What rhetorical devices did Trump use particularly effectively in his WEF speech?
Trump used the entire toolbox of populist rhetoric consistently in his speech at the WEF. At the heart of this is his typical "us against the world" framing: the USA appears as the savior, the rest of the world as a drag or beneficiary. He also makes exaggerated promises, such as when he talks about doubling stock market prices or unprecedented economic successes. These are statements that are more suited to an election campaign scenario than a World Economic Forum. Trump jumps around wildly from topic to topic: from the economy to NATO, from Greenland to interest rate policy, without a common thread but with maximum impact. These abrupt changes of topic act as a deliberate rhetorical disruptive factor, suggesting control and fragmenting the discourse. The whole thing is complemented by his mantra-like repetition of well-known claims: he has cut costs, the markets are gigantic, the political opposition is incompetent. The result is not a classic speech, but a political fighting instrument in a tailor-made suit.
«His crisis and conflict frames sit like tattoos on the forehead of the debate»
Swiss communications expert
How does Trump try to maintain attention and control of the stage even in a critical environment like the WEF?
Even in Davos, Trump remains Trump: a man who does not take the stage, but takes it over. He relies on three tried and tested levers to attract attention and keep control of the stage even in a critical, global environment such as the WEF. Firstly: agenda-setting through provocation. By rehashing the issue of Greenland, for example, or threatening to impose tariffs, he deliberately creates points of irritation that resonate far beyond his appearance and are guaranteed to generate headlines.
Secondly, the staging of his persona. Trump does not appear as a participant in a dialog, but as the main actor in a one-man show. This became particularly clear during his appearance in Davos 2026, when he used the lectern like a campaign stage and consistently ignored the multilateral topics of the forum.
Thirdly: Narrative exaggeration. Instead of engaging in nuanced analysis or expert jargon, Trump speaks in broad, polarizing messages, for example when he praises his own economic policy as a "historic triumph" and at the same time labels all critics as "gravediggers of progress".
What role do body language, voice and tempo play in his impact?
Trump deliberately uses a monotonous, repetitive pace of speech that makes it seem as if he is "preaching" his statements to the audience. He often maintains eye contact, pauses and repeats to emphasize his core statements. His body language is dominant and broad-legged, which - consciously or unconsciously - is intended to signal strength. At the same time, he produces a suspicious look and skeptical facial expressions. The result: Trump doesn't speak particularly finely, but always in the same way and that's exactly what works. His means are simple, but they work.
What can CEOs or managers learn from this speech in terms of communication - regardless of the content?
Even if you may disagree politically and in terms of content, from a purely communicative point of view, there are exciting lessons that managers can take away from Trump. Clarity beats complexity: those who communicate in a simple, direct and repetitive way will be better remembered. Those who set the agenda win the stage. Trump shows how to dominate discussions by stating early and loudly what the topic should be. In addition, a strong own brand creates recognition and trust, even if it polarizes. However, it is important to remember that good corporate communication is based on credibility, transparency and facts. But this is exactly what Trump likes to leave out, and this is where the learning moment for CEOs ends.
On a scale of 1 to 10, how brilliant is Donald Trump as a speaker purely from a communications perspective?
I would give him an 8 out of 10. He is rhetorically brilliant in terms of impact, but not in terms of content. He knows exactly how to generate and hold attention. He masters narratives, repetition and polarization like hardly anyone else. What he doesn't manage is substantial persuasion beyond his own target group. For me, this makes him something like the Elvis of self-PR.
Which statements or gestures struck you as particularly negative
For Trump, Davos was not just a stage for messages, but above all an arena for provocation. For example, he hinted at economic pressure in connection with the Greenland issue, but without any clear legal or diplomatic basis. His statements on market performance or the role of NATO were highly abbreviated, sometimes exaggerated and difficult to verify. In addition, there were populist platitudes which, in an international setting such as the WEF, focused less on dialog and more on division.
