Talk:Framing

I have been following the framing debate between Nisbit and just about everyone (at least who I usually agree with). And I am still not sure what his point is, is it really just playcate the religious middle and don't rock the boat? 24.141.169.255 12:12, 24 July 2007 (CDT)

*Sigh*

This article really sucks, in that "framing" is a universal cognitive process, the "framing effect" is a class of cognitive biases, and the problems that are being discussed here are much more specific than either (basically memetic engineering designed to take advantage of framing effects).

I'm whining because I'm too lazy to fix it, and there's always the small chance that someone else will do it for me before I manage to get around to it. --Quantheory (talk) 06:31, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Whine. indeed. !!!! ħuman 07:41, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

It's on my To Do list. It's a long list, though. --ZooGuard (talk) 08:04, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Category: False arguments

I think that category should be removed from this page. Framing is merely a tool, and may be used in the service of fascist plutarchy or responsible commonwealth. While it is true that the authoritarian message machine uses framing to promote policies contrary to the public good, framing, in itself, is not really even an argument. Casting it as an underhanded disingenuous deceitful tactic does a great disservice to those who would oppose the authoritarian message machine, which cannot be effectively countered with rational arguments.

Authoritarian frames cannot be defused on their own ground, but must be countered by promoting frames that cast the public good in positive terms, and by repeating those framings as much as possible in public view. Human neurology is such that when we have one frame in mind, other frames are inhibited. The way forward against authoritarian frames is to saturate public discourse with alternative frames; frames of empathy and responsibility have been suggested as effective countermeasures to the "father knows best" or "what's good for the plutocrats is good for creating jobs" models now in vogue.

(The misappropriated term "conservative" is a part of the authoritarian deceit, since much "conservative" ideology is in aid of radical change towards an authoritarian privateering regime, away from responsible public support of the public good, e.g. education, pollution prevention/remediation, national (gasp!) defense, public safety (including prisons), and transportation infrastructure, to name a few.) Sprocket J Cogswell (talk) 18:59, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

That doesn't not make framing a form of deceit. Imagine if you told your kid that if he studies really hard and makes a turnaround in his senior year so he can get into a good college--even if the damage to his transcripts have already been done and doesn't have a realistic chance of it happening. Will it probably motivate him more than saying that even if he's doomed to community college regardless of how hard he works he should still study hard anyway because the extra year education will be a net benefit to his life? Yes. Would the white lie have made him a better person in the long run than the unvarnished truth? Yes. Is that still a form of naked deceit for you to tell him that? Yes. --Dr. Swordopolis (talk) 02:40, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Isn't this...

...like a form of poisoning the well or guilt by association? -- Seth Peck (talk) 17:22, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Not exactly. It can be used positively as well - it was the standard response in my "interpersonal communication" courses for how to deal with workplace conflicts. — Unsigned, by: ORavenhurst / talk^{Do You Believe That?} 17:37, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Ulp, sorry, I was focusing on the negative stuff that's in the "in the United States" section. We probably need to expand this then...I'm having flashbacks to my COMM 200 class, a thousand years ago, that talked about framing as a form of "packaging" a message from sender to receiver through encoding...eesh. -- Seth Peck (talk) 17:50, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

No, that's the impression I get from this article as well. Apparently, if wikipedia is to believed, there's a distinction between Framing in general and the Framing effect, which is described as a cognitive bias. Probably worth distinguishing somehow. — Unsigned, by: ORavenhurst / talk^{Do You Believe That?} 18:04, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

The other sense of "framing"

Do we have an article on "framing" in the manipulation-of-evidence-and-perversion-of-justice sense, or should we just redirect people to Wikipedia and/or TV Tropes for that subject? --Luigifan18 (talk) 16:39, 28 March 2024 (UTC)