The Power and Perils of Framing

The Origins of Framing

When it comes to exploring a new topic, it is important to take a step back. The concept of framing is interdisciplinary, and its origins are traced back to both psychology and sociology (Cacciatore et al., 2016). Researchers Daniel Kahneman, Erving Goffman, and Amos Tversky were some of the first pioneers for framing in those specific disciplines. Then, in the early 1990’s, Robert Entman published Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm. He begins by discussing how the study of communication is often seen as not being a “real” discipline. This is due to its lack of clear core knowledge, but this is just a perceived weakness (Entman, 1993). Communication can become a major field of study by bringing these different theories together and exploring them in depth (Entman, 1993). Entman (1993) goes on to define framing by stating, “to frame is to select some aspects of a perceived reality and make them more salient in a communicating text, in such a way as to promote a particular problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation, and/or treatment recommendation for the item described” (Entman, 1993, p. 52). In simpler terms, frames diagnose causes, evaluate causal agents, and prescribe remedies (Entman, 1993).  

The Power and Risks of Framing

No matter the intention behind framing, it consistently provides a way to describe power of a communicated message and its influence on human consciousness (Entman, 1993). This, to me, is the most fascinating aspect of framing. There is so much power within messaging, and I believe Entman realized this and exclaimed for further knowledge. Within my life I have seen how damaging the misuse of a powerful tool could be, it did not matter if it was a chainsaw or a campaign. Tools can be used safely and create a positive impact, but this requires knowledge. So cracking open that old chainsaw manual will help get that pesty branch off your tree, and you won’t lose a finger in the process. That’s how I look at framing.

      If a framing tool showed up at your door today, here is what the warning label would read:

WARNING: Framing consists of a component called salience, which “refers to making a piece of information more noticeable, meaningful, or memorable to audiences” (Entman, 1993, p. 53) and increases the probability that the receivers will store the message to memory (Entman, 1993). The misuse of salience can lead to bias, abuse of power, a decline in objectivity, and the weakening of frame strength through misinformation (Chong & Druckman, 2007). Wouldn’t it be great, as a consumer, to be aware of this before tuning in to your 5 o’clock news? I’d like to think so. However, the media landscape currently relies on the ethical responsibility of those communicating. This begs the question: Is that enough?

Framing in Journalism and Media

Let’s use a journalist as an example. They enter a culture that pushes the idea of “objective” writing, however if the person behind the pen lacks knowledge of framing they can “allow the most skillful media manipulators to impose their dominant frames on the news” (Entman, 2007, p. 56). Entman (2007) often discusses bias and proposed using insights from areas such as framing to create a new effort in understanding its effects on political power specifically. Bias consists of three concepts: distortion, content, and decision making, according to Entman (2007). With at least some integration and understanding of these concepts two goals can be reached:

1. A better understanding of how the media influences power and shapes communication.

2. It can provide useful knowledge for scholars or journalists aiming for fair reporting and citizens who feel impacted by media bias (Entman, 2007).

All of this is to say while framing can often flirt with bias, the only way to begin eliminating it from the media landscape is to study it further.

Framing in My Own Work

Personally, I have had a strong interest in framing throughout this semester so far. I am not only thinking about it in this current course, but for my final master’s project coming up. Within this project I will be discussing a new TV product on the market and have been following our readings here closely to see how I can best frame it to my potential audience. As someone who has studied journalism in the past and continues to work within the media landscape, I take great pride in objectivity and facts. While this product doesn’t emit any political discourse from my current knowledge, I will need to use framing to approach different audiences generationally. This is when understanding your audience’s values plays a great role in how you will frame a message. To make an impact, it’s important to shape messages in a way that connects with a specific generation’s values and experiences (Entman, 1993). People naturally respond to information based on what they already know and believe (Chong & Druckman, 2007). Plus, messages that tap into deep-rooted cultural values are more likely to change minds (Dorfman & Herbert, 2007). That’s why communicators need to understand their audience’s background and adjust their approach to make their message stick.

Conclusion

Framing is a powerful tool. It is one that can mold viewpoints, influence public debate, and even determine history as we know it. Understanding its methods is necessary, not just for journalists, but for all of those who consume media. Without awareness, framing can easily be misused, leading to bias, misinformation, and a distortion of reality. However, when applied ethically and strategically, it can enhance communication, foster understanding, and ensure messages resonate with their intended audiences. As I continue my studies and work within the media landscape, I recognize the responsibility that comes with framing. Whether it’s launching a new TV product or analyzing news coverage, knowing how to craft and understand frames is crucial. Just like any powerful tool, framing must be handled with care.

References

Cacciatore, M. A., Scheufele, D. A., & Iyengar, S. (2016). The end of framing as we know it… and the future of media effects. Mass Communication and Society, 19(1), 7–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2015.1068811​:contentReference[oaicite:1]{index=1}

Chong, D., & Druckman, J. N. (2007). Framing theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 10(1), 103–126. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.10.072805.103054

Dorfman, L., & Herbert, S. (2007). Communicating for change: Module 3: Shaping public debate with framing and messages. The California Endowment, Center for Healthy Communities.

Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x​:contentReference[oaicite:0]{index=0}

Entman, R. M. (2007). Framing bias: Media in the distribution of power. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 163–173.