If Facts Don’t Matter, What Does?

[SecularMotion]

I first began reading the works of linguist and cognitive scientist George Lakoff about 15 years ago and I was struck by the Berkeley professor’s now famous ideas about what he calls frames. In public relations our stock in trade is messaging, because our role is to create understanding by combining maximum clarity with supreme brevity. We work in the world of sound bites and elevator pitches that are designed to be short and pithy, and we rarely have the time or budget to delve into frames or deeply moving narratives.

When I started writing I’m Right and You’re and Idiot I wanted to better understand the difference between messages and frames, so I would know how frames work and be able to explain how to manage them. I wanted to better understand how they relate to the mechanics of public debate, and especially how frames impact facts and scientific evidence in public discourse, or when shaping opinion.

When we met, Lakoff described frames as metaphors and conceptual frameworks that we use to interpret and understand the world. They give meaning to the words we hear more than the other way around, because words don’t have objective meanings independent of these metaphors. Frames are structures of thought that we all use every day to determine meaning in our lives; frames govern how we act. They are ultimately a blend of feelings, values and data related to how we see the world.

We can’t think without frames, Lakoff explained. “Every thought you have, every word is defined in terms of a frame. You can’t say any word that’s meaningful without it activating a frame.” Frames permeate everything we think and say, so the people who control language and set its frames have an inordinate amount of power.

http://www.desmogblog.com/2016/06/18/if-facts-don-t-matter-what-does

[seabeckind]

1. So, so true

Bumper sticker, label cognition.

Thinking a complex topic can be explained in a sound bite and too lazy to find out it can't.

Goes along with the Dunning-Kruger effect.

[bemildred]

2. This ought to be good.

"What is the meaning of meaning", or as Pres. Clinton put it, what the meaning of "is" is.


Lakoff is right about this though:

I asked Lakoff if it’s possible to set the record straight. Every time we say, “those are not job creators,” do we step into the job creator frame and imprint it again? By outlining facts, even in a logical statement of contradiction, do we always help reinforce the other side’s point of view?

Yes, he said. You lose the persuasion battle when you consistently step into your opponent’s frame; it reinforces their morality and their argument in the minds of your audience. The way to respond is to not mention the other frame. Only mention yours. Always start with your frame and stay in it. Always be on the offensive; never act defensively.

You see this here every day.

[Ford_Prefect]

4. I can think of a good few NEO-Democrats who ought to be told this. Those who gave away so much.

The ones who insist we cannot go there, we cannot win on "those" issues, so do not raise them. The ones who believe we must bargain away what we have to get any little crumb the opposition will leave us.

They accept and allow the frames to be set by the conservatives and the exploiters, or else they are being told to do it by their patrons and corporate sponsors. We can expect much more of the same from the next administration, as they have taken great pains to make clear while they consolidate their version of Democratic Party Dogma.

Newspeak 2.0 has arrived.

[bemildred]

5. If you don't say what you want, you probably won't get it.

It's as simple as that.

[jtuck004]

6. "Those who gave away so much." < Maybe the problem is people fooling themselves,

pretending that the person they voted for, twice, has their best interests at heart after they proved them wrong the first time. Maybe the people you seek to instruct intended to give it away all along, and we let ourselves be fooled, because it is easier than taking responsibility.

Research is indicating that sitting more than 20 or 30 minutes without standing at work leads to an early death. Sitting in politics can too.

People can get out of their lazyboys and turn off the cable, get the world they want. Or they are gonna get the one they deserve.

[Solly Mack]

3. K&R

[elljay]

7. Pro-choice vs pro-life

To me, this is the biggest framing mistake we make. It implies that the contrast is between people who want to preserve life and people who believe that killing should be a permitted choice. Look at what has happened since Roe v Wade- a thorough gutting of abortion rights. We need to stop using those terms in favor of something like Pro Abortion Rights and Forced Birth Supporters. Similarly, we should not, as our presumptive candidate has, refer to blastocysts and fetuses as "unborn children." It plays right into their hands.

[elleng]

8. Thanks for highlighting George Lakoff's work,

something I've tried to do over the years.