|
|
"A comprehensive, collaborative elections resource."
|
If 'framing' gives Dems message discipline, so be it
|
|---|
| Parent(s) |
Party
|
| Contributor | ArmyDem |
| Last Edited | ArmyDem Jul 18, 2005 02:06pm |
| Logged |
0
|
| Category | Blog Entry |
| News Date | Monday, July 18, 2005 08:00:00 PM UTC0:0 |
| Description | Posted 2:22 pm | Printer Friendly
Matt Bai wrote a fascinating item yesterday for the New York Times Magazine on what he calls "The Framing Wars." It was the latest in a series of articles on George Lakoff, "Don't Think of an Elephant!," and the left's embrace of a strategy for the future that centers around a more effective use of language as a resource.
I'm not entirely convinced that Lakoff's approach to framing is the Holy Grail for Dems, but there's one thing in Bai's article that deserves special attention: Dems' new-found appreciation for message discipline. Bai pointed, for example, to the way in which they approach the fight over the nuclear option.
[snip]
So, what did Dems do with this? They did something they usually either fail to do or do badly: craft a persuasive message and stick to it.
[snip]
Terrific. Dems needed a message, found out which one worked best, and hammered it home. The result wasn't perfect — the Gang of 14's compromise effectively ended the fight — but considering the 55-45 advantage the GOP enjoys, and the support for the nuclear option among the Republican base, the message strategy was largely a success. People didn't buy the GOP argument.
Was this framing? I'm not entirely sure; the word seems to mean different things to different people. It sounds more like message development, or "crafting" if you prefer, whereby one comes up with memorable phrases and sound-bites that resonate with the public. |
| Share |
|
|
2¢
|
|
| Article | Read Full Article |
|
| Date |
Category |
Headline |
Article |
Contributor |
|
|
