The advice above is from a Political Research Associates (PRA) document titled "Ground Rules and Tips for Challenging the Right." There are three sections--Do Your Homework, Stay Cool in Public, and Keep Organizing--each with several suggestions.

Framing is not a new concept, and traces back to the work of sociologist Erving Goffman in the mid 1970s (Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience), based on his work beginning in the late 1950s.

William A. Gamson and Charlotte Ryan are sociologists who help progressive social movements use "framing" to increase their effectiveness. They wrote an article, "Thinking about Elephants: Toward a Dialogue with George Lakoff, in the Public Eye Magazine in the Fall of 2005. Here is how they explained the concept:

Facts never speak for themselves. They take on their meaning by being embedded in frames, themes which organize thoughts, rendering some facts as relevant and significant and others as irrelevant and trivial. Framing matters and the contest is lost at the outset if one allows one's adversaries to define the terms of the debate. To be selfconscious about framing strategy is not being manipulative. It gives coherent meaning to what is happening in the world. One can either do it unconsciously, or with deliberation and conscious thought. A frame is a thought organizer. Like a picture frame, it puts a rim around some part of the world, highlighting certain events and facts as important and rendering others invisible. Like a building frame, it holds things together but is covered by insulation and walls. It provides coherence to an array of symbols, images, and arguments, linking them through an underlying organizing idea that suggests what is essential — what consequences and values are at stake. We do not see the frame directly, but infer its presence by its characteristic expressions and language.

The whole article is here.

Gamson and Ryan are critical of Lakoff for relying on a marketing model that ignores how social movements create frames through a group process that involves strategic empowerment. They point out that Lakoff points to the role of think tanks (primarily his own Rockridge Institute), while ignoring the many progressive social movements that have reframed public debates. This is even true with Lakoff's anlysis of the U.S. Political Right. According to Gamson and Ryan, Lakoff:

...has nothing to say about the rise of a relevant social movement, the Christian Right, in the late 1970s. The Christian Right's infrastructure supported conservative frames in ways that went far beyond finding better ways of marketing their message. Political scientist Duane Oldfield describes how evangelicals built movement- oriented broadcast media and active local congregations to grow in political significance. 4 By the late 1980s, the influence of the movement was directed through the Republican Party. Christian Right organizations did a lot of movement-building work to further the success of their preferred frame but often remained behind the scenes. On the abortion issue, for example, they rarely speak to the media directly but support broader coalitions such as the National Right to Life Committee as spokespersons for their movement's frame.

Next week, I will explore the relationships among framing, narratives, and ideology.

---

Ground Rules and Tips for Challenging the Right

Making Distinctions - Seeing Possibilities (1)
Recognize that the Right is a Complex Movement (2)
Respecting the Right to Hold Religious Beliefs You Find Offensive (3)
Decode the Right's Agenda on Your Issue (4a)
Ideology, Frames, and Narratives in Right-Wing Social Movements (4b)
How do Social Movements Gain Political Power? (4c)

---

Chip Berlet, Senior Analyst, Political Research Associates
The Public Eye: Website of Political Research Associates --- Chip's Blog

---