Leaving Lakoff Behind
Ezra Klein thinks the Democrats should be wary before embracing George Lakoff because he's so bad at framing issues. (He take particular issue with the "Strong Father" frame, which is sparking discussion even now at the Rockridge Institute - it's interesting how gender issues continue to pervade everything.) I haven't read his book so I can't comment on how good or bad he is at framing issues but I want to agree for another reason: there's nothing original about Lakoff at all!
Anyone who has read any of the reasonably scholarly literature on social movements will have come across the material about framing that dominates that literature (e.g. Tarrow, McAdam and Snow, etc., etc.). It's really fascinating to read and there's even material about what makes a frame effective, how frames work, and so on. I'd strongly urge that Democrats read some of this material before turning to a quickie book (which, admittedly, I have not read) that claims to solve all their problems for them. Believe it or not, academics occasionally produce useful material and this might be some of it.
More importantly, it's not like commentators on politics have been ignorant of the importance of frames. For instance, Kathleen Hall Jamieson and company do a magnificent job in The Press Effect of laying out how the Bush campaign used frames during the Florida recount to secure the election for the president. I'm sure there's more that, while not using explicit language of "frames," touches on the same issues.
I hope it is not surprising to anyone that the way in which we talk about issues is vitally important. If it takes a guy like Lakoff to bring this to everyone's attention, then I suppose we should be thankful for that. But come on. If this is the first time that Democrats are realizing the power of political discourse then maybe the party is in worse shape than I thought.
Anyone who has read any of the reasonably scholarly literature on social movements will have come across the material about framing that dominates that literature (e.g. Tarrow, McAdam and Snow, etc., etc.). It's really fascinating to read and there's even material about what makes a frame effective, how frames work, and so on. I'd strongly urge that Democrats read some of this material before turning to a quickie book (which, admittedly, I have not read) that claims to solve all their problems for them. Believe it or not, academics occasionally produce useful material and this might be some of it.
More importantly, it's not like commentators on politics have been ignorant of the importance of frames. For instance, Kathleen Hall Jamieson and company do a magnificent job in The Press Effect of laying out how the Bush campaign used frames during the Florida recount to secure the election for the president. I'm sure there's more that, while not using explicit language of "frames," touches on the same issues.
I hope it is not surprising to anyone that the way in which we talk about issues is vitally important. If it takes a guy like Lakoff to bring this to everyone's attention, then I suppose we should be thankful for that. But come on. If this is the first time that Democrats are realizing the power of political discourse then maybe the party is in worse shape than I thought.
posted by Jesse Zink at 7:10 PM Permalink
|
<< Home