There is an on-going attention among scholars on the analysis of conflicts in divided societies. They highlight an interesting paradox at the heart of linguistically divided democracies and especially of federal countries. Federalism is often seen as a solution to reduce tensions and reach compromises, yet it also fosters additional tensions (e.g. demands for self-rule). While studies of federalism have discussed the institutional and political nature of federalising reforms, one main question remains: how do elites sell these reforms to the public? Belgium provides a case in point to study such dynamics, with a long-started opposition between two linguistic groups (Flemish and Francophones) that led to six State reforms in forty-five years. Building on an interdisciplinary approach bringing together political science and linguistics, this paper investigates the discourses of Belgian politicians on federalism through the six Belgian State reforms. We analyse discourses of Belgian politicians during television debates from the time of the first State reforms in the 1970’s until present time. We rely on an original longitudinal corpus of 81 television debates covering 50 years from the francophone public broadcaster, RTBF, in Belgium featuring French-speaking and Dutch-speaking politicians as well as representatives from the civil society and experts. The selected television debates relate to the progressive – albeit not without political tensions – transformation of Belgium’s federal system. Our corpus is thus a solid indicator of this political transformation and allows identifying, for the different State reforms, how Belgian political elites framed their standpoints on this critical issue. A quantitative and qualitative content analysis will be used to identify the selling points used by elites to defend or criticise the State reforms. As a State reform is quite complex and technical, it is crucial to identify how elites present this to the public to make it more or less desirable. Our analysis covers the ...