An Introduction to
Framing
Kao-Ping Chua
Jack Rutledge Fellow, 2005-2006
American Medical Student Association
Outline

Framing 101



What is a frame?
Why are frames important to politics?
Example of framing: universal health care
(UHC)


How not to talk about UHC
How to talk about UHC
What is a frame?

A frame is a conceptual structure used in
thinking.

Psychology equivalent: You can think of it as
a “schema”

Neuroscience equivalent: You can think of it
a neural circuit (connected group of neurons
and synapses)
The “elephant” frame
Big
Elephant
Animal
Grey
Floppy ears
A frame is a story. The “elephant” frame tells the story of
a big, grey animal with floppy ears.
Frames can be changed (reframed)

If a new species of pink elephants evolved
and grey ones went extinct…
Big
Elephant
Animal
Pink
Floppy ears
Frames can be changed (reframed)

Or, if the phrase “pink elephants” became
wildly popular …
Big
Elephant
Pink
Animal
Grey
Floppy ears
Framing and politics: “tax relief”

Taxes have never been popular, but they
were not always seen as an affliction as
they are today.

Tax opponents used the phrase “tax relief”
to reframe taxes as an affliction.
How “tax relief” reframes taxes

Relief  implies burden or affliction

Person who relieves burden  hero. The “hero
frame” is activated  people want to support
hero.

Person who supports burden  villain. The
“villain” frame is activated  people want to
oppose villain.
Other “reframing” of taxes over past
few decades

Taxes are anti-American; they decrease the
number of jobs and hurt the economy.

Taxes are just a way for the government to
take your money and waste it on inefficient
social programs.
“Tax” frame: before and after
Duty
Taxes
Investment
In America
Enables government
to function
Affliction
Taxes
AntiAmerican
Government waste
Facts vs. Frame

A person’s frame determines what truths a
person is likely to accept

George Lakoff: “If the truth doesn’t fit the
existing frame, the frame will stay in place and
the truth will dissipate.”

The truth does NOT set you free -- the truth
matters most if it fits the frame.
Messaging vs. reframing

Messaging is simply about coming up with
a clever phrase – it’s advertising/marketing.

Reframing is deeper – it is about changing
our relationship to the world and how we
think about it.
How to use framing to generate
support for an issue

It’s not about finding a clever message…

…but rather making sure that the message
you use associates positive values with the
frame of your issue.
Lakoff’s levels of analysis

Level 1: Universal values, like equity,
justice, fairness, prosperity, etc.

Level 2: Issue types: environmental issues,
human rights issues, moral issues, etc.

Level 3: Specific issues: housing,
education, health care, etc.
Level 1: Values and Principles
Conservative
Liberal/Progressive
Self-discipline, Reward for work, selfdetermination, rugged individualism, personal
responsibility, government hurts
Obligation to the collective good, shared
responsibility, unequal starting places need
remedies, government helps
Level 2: Issue Categories
Moral behavior, taxes, education
Poverty, social welfare, inequality
Level 3: Programs and Policies
Tax cuts, business incentives to create
opportunity, short term “boot strap” help for
individuals, medical savings accounts
Child care, universal access to health care,
housing, educational assistance so people can
take advantage of opportunity
Basic Argument
Welfare hurts rather than helps by undermining
the very attributes that people need to be
successful (hard work, self-discipline etc). It
makes people dependent rather than
independent. It rewards immoral behavior by
giving people something that they have not
earned, thus worsening the problem.
Welfare helps by giving people the basic
necessities they need to be successful. It makes
people independent by providing a helping hand.
It encourages moral behavior of the society by
sharing with those who are disadvantaged. It is
a manifestation of our obligation to the collective
good.
Framing universal health care: an
illustration of how framing works

People’s FRAME about health care flies in
the face of facts all the time.



Many people will believe anything they hear
about waiting lists in Canada…
…and doubt evidence about the superiority of
Canada’s system on health outcomes
Of course, this is also true of supporters of
a Canada-style system!
Frames that work against UHC







The government can’t do anything right
Free market is more efficient
Individual responsibility (ownership society)
Anti-freeloading/anti-welfare
Just desserts
American exceptionalism
Tax affliction
How NOT to talk about UHC, #1
“Cover the uninsured”
“There are 45 million uninsured Americans, which is
1 out of every 7 people in this country. 18,000
people die per year because they lack insurance,
and millions more suffer from poor health. This
needless suffering by the uninsured is
unacceptable in a country as rich as ours. It is
time for us to join the rest of the industrialized
world and cover the uninsured.”
How “Cover the uninsured” affects the
UHC frame
Universal
health care
Only
benefits
uninsured
Welfare
Welfare queen
Enables laziness
A better approach: “Cover everyone”

“Health care costs are skyrocketing out of control,
placing all of us at risk for losing health insurance
through no fault of our own. In today’s rapidly
changing economy, job turnover is at an all-time
high, which means that all of us are just one pink
slip away from being uninsured and risking
financial catastrophe. It is our shared
responsibility to ensure that every American can
have the security from health care costs that they
need in order to take care of themselves and their
family.”
UHC frame with “Cover everyone” vs.
“cover the uninsured”
Universal
Health care
Everyone
benefits
I’m affected
Family’s
affected
Self-interest
Family values
Universal
health care
Only
benefits
uninsured
Welfare
Welfare queen
Enables laziness
This is not just a matter of semantics!
If you continually say “cover the
uninsured” when you talk about UHC,
you are going to help reframe it as a
welfare issue, which is BAD
Once something has been framed a
certain way, it’s HARD to reframe it.
How not to talk about UHC #2

“Country X’s system is better than ours”

Opposing frame: American exceptionalism

Better approach:

“We live in the wealthiest country on earth. Almost every
major developed country provides health insurance for all
of its people. No one in an advanced country like ours
should have to worry about whether they can afford health
care for themselves and for their families.”
How not to talk about UHC, #3

Oodles and oodles of statistics

Statistics, while important, are much
less powerful at activating frames than
direct appeals to values

Stats don’t “speak to people”
How to talk about UHC #1
The concepts “A rapidly changing economy means
anyone can lose insurance” and “what if you didn’t
have health insurance” are related to the frame
“security”…
So we must argue that universal health care will
provide security!
How to talk about UHC #2
The concept “Illness can wipe families out” is
related to the frame of “family values.”
…so talking about UHC as a way to help
people take care of their families makes
UHC a family value!
How to talk about UHC #3
The concepts “It’s cheaper in the long run to make
sure people can access care” and “preventive
care for everyone means less disease” are related
to the frame of “efficiency”…
…so we should talk about universal health care as
being economically efficient.
Take-home points on framing

Think about why your frame about an issue is the way it is –
what values underlie it?

Do the same thing for other people you’re trying to convince

In the short-term, look for opportunities to turn their values
into support for your issue

In the long-term, be careful about how you frame your issue –
always ask yourself, “What frames am I activating with the
way I’m talking about my issue?”
Summary and caveats

In the end, framing is a powerful tool for achieving
social change…

But it’s just a tool…

…and it’s not the only tool…

…and the task is never just framing a single issue
– other things (e.g. government) have to reframed
as well.