Framing the issues: how conservatives use language to dominate politics

[therapist]

How does language influence the terms of political debate?

Language always comes with what is called "framing." Every word is defined relative to a conceptual framework. If you have something like "revolt," that implies a population that is being ruled unfairly, or assumes it is being ruled unfairly, and that they are throwing off their rulers, which would be considered a good thing. That's a frame.

If you then add the word "voter" in front of "revolt," you get a metaphorical meaning saying that the voters are the oppressed people, the governor is the oppressive ruler, that they have ousted him and this is a good thing and all things are good now. All of that comes up when you see a headline like "voter revolt" — something that most people read and never notice. But these things can be affected by reporters and very often, by the campaign people themselves.

Here's another example of how powerful framing is. In Arnold Schwarzenegger's acceptance speech, he said, "When the people win, politics as usual loses." What's that about? Well, he knows that he's going to face a Democratic legislature, so what he has done is frame himself and also Republican politicians as the people, while framing Democratic politicians as politics as usual — in advance. The Democratic legislators won't know what hit them. They're automatically framed as enemies of the people.

more:

http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/10/27_lakoff.shtml

also "The 'free market' doesn't exist":
http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/10/27_lakoff_p2.shtml

I love this article. Strict father and nurturant parent frameworks makes so much sense.

[mzmolly]

1. Lakoff is working with Dean and the DNC to my understanding.

Who ever gets the nom should hire him. :hi:


WELCOME!!!!

[therapist]

2. I hope they can come up with better ideas for Iraq war

Framing illegal war as "stay the course" is revolting..

[mzmolly]

3. I think we knew going in we'd be stuck.

One of the reasons so many were against it.

The way I see it, were damned if we do, were damned if we don't.

[sweetheart]

4. nuclear winter

Another of those mythical frames that was created and spun out of
pure ether. There is as well, the ontology of the frame. Why did not
sweetheart title the post "Reproductive rights"? The mystery of
choosing which title to headline, which story to frontpage and which
to bury is ontology, the mystery of naming.

In this regard, we're scattered as well, pushing 1000 single issue
political adgenda's and creating less cohesion, less synergy. When the
ontology and the framing comes together, it seems a coincidence to the
reader/viewer, that the news complements and alludes to its other
parts. If we're to achieve this proper, we must accept a role within
the good gals' propaganda machine, the role of the conductor, the
ontogist who brings the frames together to make a gallery view.

Framing is per-single issue and dead important, but without the
cohesion of concert, the impact is lost.

[therapist]

5. My dream...

I wish we wouldn't need to worry about framing and rather dig into the substance of the issues.

Currently political game is anchored around insecure mindset - "what will they think of me" is most important issue for both parties.

[sweetheart]

7. Nothing to Fear but Fear itself.

Would that there be a great hearted leader to speak from the POV
you mention. As it stands, we are but a stained glass window, some
green, some yellow, some red, welded together with lead, copper and
solder. Without a stained glass artist, we're no composition, but a
vogue collection of dissent.

And yet in our world, there are so few persons of such deep will and
roots of self confidence to step forward, who have no skeletons, malefic
swift boat crews, or young mistresses. Then, is that it, we are reduced
to dirt and total repression by our inability to cooperate in a greater
gallery of frames?

I agree with you that the root issue is bloody simple.. .and once
previously the democrats, in another age of presidents without a media
anal-probe, presented that very coherent sanity.

There is nothing to fear but fear itself. That is the truth, and all
this fear is the salesmanship of insubstantial men, paranoids and
lesser dross who should never have been let near the levers of
ldearship.

[ovidsen]

6. Excellent links!

I have come to admire (in a perverse way) the GOP's talent for twisting language.

My favorite example: They're not "anti-abortion", they're "pro-life".

Of course, they sometimes do screw up. It was the B* camp that endorsed the concept of "privatizing Social Security", which tanked. They quickly switched to "individual accounts" in an "ownership society". Now, when folks ask GOP lawmakers about private accounts, they're rudely corrected.

Hey! Thank you George Orwell! War is Peace! Slavery is Freedom!

What the Democrats need is a good, ruthless linguist with a PhD in sound bites.

[therapist]

8. change needed

>>What the Democrats need is a good, ruthless linguist with a PhD in sound bites.

Yes, but democrats are forced to use GOP methods and i don't think we can trust any political party not to sell, get bribed, coerced, corrupted, etc.. Look at staunch "antiwar" Howard Dean or Al Franken who suddenly became complacient "stay the course" hacks.

We need to adjust the system so orwellian methods of language manipulation and population control become ineffective/illegal/frowned upon.

[ovidsen]

9. I wish

We need to adjust the system so orwellian methods of language manipulation and population control become ineffective/illegal/frowned upon.

Call me old and cynical, but it'll never happen. It's very hard to adjust human nature.

And sometimes the best way to beat 'em, is to join 'em... and then beat 'em. :headbang:

[spindoctor]

10. This is old news but still very prevalent.

Thanks for bringing it back to our attention, because obviously we have not managed to counter this Republican strategy since it was identified 2 years ago.

In part that is the weakness of the Democratic party. We just aren't very good in fighting dirty. On the flipside, I am not sure if I would want to be a member of "the other gang".

So rather than sinking to their level, we need to find a way to rise above it and in the ancient art of self defense use our opponent's strength against itself.

The problem there is that we do not face our opponents directly other than on the house floor. Since C-SPAN ratings are at best insignificant, the issues are presented to the public by the network pundits who appear to be very sensitive to politically issued "talking points".

Pundits are however easy to manipulate because they only bow to one master: ratings.
What we need to do is mass-protest every mention of an incorrect term and patiently grow their awareness to it. It won't change overnight, but it will change.

[omega minimo]

11. Revolting

Why is the framing fad so catchy that a few phrases thrown out about how framing is as framing does and we think we know what we're talking about-- we assume that those meaningless phrases mean something by pointing out the meaninglessness?

Nonsense. :evilfrown:

"So rather than sinking to their level, we need to find a way to rise above it and in the ancient art of self defense use our opponent's strength against itself."

Yes, read carefully and consider whether it reads like a bloody parody and choose whether to be baited or not.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.