FRAMING

[aidanjm]

I thought I'd start a thread on framing. Maybe we could pull apart various conservative/ right wing frames in this thread. Are there any frames that you find particularly irritating?

-the war on terror
-the social security crisis
-supporting our troops
-tax relief
-preserving traditional marriage
-protecting marriage
-Bush haters
-liberals as haters/ "whatever feeds your hate"


Essential reading:

Framing the issues: UC Berkeley professor George Lakoff tells how conservatives use language to dominate politics

Why do conservatives appear to be so much better at framing?

Because they've put billions of dollars into it. Over the last 30 years their think tanks have made a heavy investment in ideas and in language. In 1970, [Supreme Court Justice] Lewis Powell wrote a fateful memo to the National Chamber of Commerce saying that all of our best students are becoming anti-business because of the Vietnam War, and that we needed to do something about it. Powell's agenda included getting wealthy conservatives to set up professorships, setting up institutes on and off campus where intellectuals would write books from a conservative business perspective, and setting up think tanks. He outlined the whole thing in 1970. They set up the Heritage Foundation in 1973, and the Manhattan Institute after that. [There are many others, including the American Enterprise Institute and the Hoover Institute at Stanford, which date from the 1940s.]

And now, as the New York Times Magazine quoted Paul Weyrich, who started the Heritage Foundation, they have 1,500 conservative radio talk show hosts. They have a huge, very good operation, and they understand their own moral system. They understand what unites conservatives, and they understand how to talk about it, and they are constantly updating their research on how best to express their ideas.


Linguistics professor George Lakoff dissects the "war on terror" and other conservative catchphrases


We'll Grant This to the Republicans: They Know How to Frame Issues and Keep the Democrats on the Defensive. A BuzzFlash Interview with "Framing" Expert, UC Berkeley Professor George Lakoff

 

[conjur]

When a debate cannot be won on the merits of one's position, resort to propaganda and browbeating.


Debate....the lost art of our government.

 

[Stunt]

I don't think that republicans are any better or worse at "framing" than democrats. I mean the governing party always has the advantage of being able to set the agenda and propose legislation. When you are the one in control, there is nothing that the other side can really do except take the opposite position.

I do think that the republican machine is far more effective in getting their message accross.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Stunt

I do think that the republican machine is far more effective in getting their message across.

Except the Religious portion of their agenda is getting through.

 

[Stunt]

I dont think that social security or iraq war has much to do with religion.
But yes the religious agenda is very much a focus of their messages as it appeals to their electorate.

 

[PatboyX]

Originally posted by: Stunt
I dont think that social security or iraq war has much to do with religion.
But yes the religious agenda is very much a focus of their messages as it appeals to their electorate.

but social security wasnt really framed with any success. there was an attempt to create this panic like wmds in iraq over this looming crisis and it failed. so...while the iraq bit did work, it was sort of revealed later for what it was which then helped add to its own failure in framing as well as the failure to frame social security.
i think one of the reasons they stick with religious agenda is because it is working very well and its got a built-in support group.

 

[Jhhnn]

Few people really understand that the Republican message has been honed and perfected in various Right-think Tanks for over 30 years, beginning with the Heritage Foundation. As such, they've become masters of the pre-packaged frame, simply because they've devoted a lot of time, effort and money towards it, employing psychologists and PR types, using focus groups, and then floating out various methods on the local level to evaluate the effectiveness... nor has it hurt to have Limbaugh, Savage, Hannity and others on their direct email lists, either... their message and methods haven't changed much at all in the last 10 years or so.

Perhaps the most important things they've been able to exploit have been emotional issues, or preying on the emotional aspects of purely practical matters, like taxes. And perhaps the most stunning thing they've discovered, quite accidentally, is that they can do exactly the oposite of what they say, and get away with it, if they use the right words, push the right buttons.

People still believe that Repubs want "Smaller, less intrusive government", even as the Patriot act and explosive spending deny the reality of that perception, not to mention their utterly unprincipled meddling in the Schiavo affair...

Some of my favorites-

No child left behind- so wrong in so many ways it amounts to an effort to destroy the public school system- the burdens aren't offset with the financial support to carry them....

Healthy Forests- More like "no tree left behind"

Clear Skies initiative- allows plant operators to use their worst days' emissions as a baseline, effectively raising emissions along with output...

African AIDS program- just spreading abstinence only claptrap there, too...

Perhaps their greatest miscalculation in recent memory would be wrt Schiavo- it's clearly a loser, at this point- I suspect it wasn't sufficiently tested before running it up the really big flagpole- more of an ad hoc thing, really, not showing the usual meticulous testing and planning, along with the shrewd perception of how to manipulate public opinion...

9/11 has been ruthlessly exploited, along with the economic downturn, leading me to think that those strategies were framed and planned out over a long time period, long before either event occurred. That's not to say that those plans were specific to 9/11, at all, but that the "What if's" had been thoroughly explored by the thinkers and planners of the PNAC and others... It was their big chance, and they jumped on it with both feet... Hell, "9/11 changed Everything" even let them sell the invasion of Iraq, imprisonment without charge, and the whole Homeland Security apparatus... None of which real conservatives would have supported if Clinton had proposed it...

And it's all really based on a well-cultured system of belief among the electorate, reminiscent of the kind of faith associated with demagogery through history. You don't have to tell the truth, or do what you say, you merely have to convince people it is the truth, and that you're doing what you said... they don't want and will often refuse to see the disconnect, at all, provided that their belief has been properly cultivated by putting things in the perspective you want the public to see them from- Framing.

Even GWB's bumbling speaking style serves to advance the illusion. It's tough for most people to even imagine that the guy is smart enough to manipulate their headsets in ways subtle and profound, but he is, he really is very shrewd, very manipulative. Some see through him like a sheet of glass, others only see the reflections from the surface...