After reading the article assigned for class on framing, I got worried about how much was really going on under the surface. How much was I being biased unconsciously? And how much was really out of my control. I decided to pay extra attention throughout the day in case I noticed any particular framing situations.
For those of you who do not know, framing is a concept in cognitive psychology in which issues are framed in a certain context to make you feel a certain way about them. People like politicians are aware of framing, and advocate for the ones their campaign represents. Once frames are in place, they will shape newer ideas in a direction that correlates with the frame itself. Surface frames may be a particular idea or cause, but deep frames are a set of values and morals. Surface frames activate the deep frames already in place and stimulate the surface frames in return.
During our social justice society meeting, we are working on an event which will consist of a paneled discussion about how men can help empower women. The debate taking place tonight was to title this event. Someone suggested that we say it simply: “Yes We Can: How Men Can Empower Women.” I think this might stimulate an existing frame with negative connotations associated with women's right. Having to empower women brings up the beliefs and thoughts about how women were once not empowered, and how at one point they were indeed inferior. Furthermore, it brings to mind a frame associated with radical feminism. We must find a way to retitle this event by integrating a new frame, and not reworking the old. I am all open to suggestions
Interesting event. A title like that catches the attention because it refers to a frame we are already familiar with from the Obama campaign of 2008. I don't know if people will assume it's radical, although they will assume it's liberal.
ReplyDelete