Everyone uses framing. This goes on consciously and unconsciously. Some do it more than others, and it doesn't have to be with bad intentions. We also see framing a lot in the media and politics. But what is it really? Should we be more aware of framing in the media? In this blog, we dive deeper into what framing in the media is and how it can be used.
Framing is an influence technique common in media and politics. It is the idea that the way you present something can evoke different reactions. Words can have positive or negative connotations. An example of framing we all know: "The glass is half full" versus "The glass is half empty." Half-full sounds optimistic because "full" has a positive connotation in this example. The word "empty," on the other hand, has a negative connotation. This example is used primarily to indicate that a different perspective can provide new insights. How you view something can impact your choices.
Framing in the media and fake news often go together. Mainly when we talk about misleading content. In the case of misleading content, information is shared that is one-sided, for example, or misleading statistics are used. In fact, graphics and visuals that display information increase the reliability of the news. This then leads to biased perspectives, while the information is thus incomplete.
Leaving out information and putting a spin on its meaning can create major miscommunications. But framing is not necessarily a bad thing. It can also be used to reinforce certain messages. Therefore, framing is neither good nor bad, but it is important to realize that it can be used with bad intentions.
There are different types of frames that the media can employ. De Vreese (2005) suggests six types of framing in the media:
This form of framing is widely used in reporting on politics. This strategic method of framing focuses on a winner ("the hero") and a loser ("the bad guy"). Generic framing also values polls and often includes recommendations from leading people.
A good example of this is the media in America. FOX News and CNN both have a completely different way of framing. They both frame from a different political point of view. FOX News from a Republican perspective, CNN with a Democratic perspective. Especially during the 2020 election, this became very clear. In fact, both news channels had their own hero and villain. In the image below, you can see how they applied framing to Trump.
Conflict framing is applied when reporting, you guessed it, conflicts. This mainly involves disagreements between individuals, countries or organizations. In this process, impartial information is shared.
An example where this type of framing occurs in the media is with the reporting of a war. The information being shared is impartial. Yet there will undoubtedly be framing by the journalist. It is more subtle, but still present.
This focuses on describing individuals and groups affected by a problem or event. This can be a tool to call attention to something.
An example is a nonprofit organization launching a public relations campaign to recruit more members. The focus in this campaign is on a group of people, who have been affected by a natural disaster. The media write about this group of people in detail. The media tells the story behind this group and uses images that reflect their current situation.
Presenting a problem in such a way that responsibility is placed on an agency, group or individual. This may be because they are responsible for solving or causing this problem.
An example: a new movie is coming out. However, the production of this did not go very smoothly. The catering was not well organized and several employees got sick from the food. The media pick up on this. Basically, it is not the fault of the movie studio, but of the caterer. Yet the media puts the responsibility on the studio. This kind of framing creates negative publicity.
This method of framing consists of emphasizing the economic impact a particular event will have on the target audience, such as on a country or another individual.
An example is the blocked Suez Canal in 2021. There was a lot of talk about the economic consequences in the media. There was mostly talk about the economic impact on the Netherlands, such as the price of oil and goods could go up.
Interprets an event or problem in the context of religious principles or moral precepts. Framing with this context allows you to elicit emotions from specific audiences. This method of framing in the media can be very sensitive.
We see this reflected in the pro-life and pro-choice movements. Pro-life stands for anti-abortion. Using framing, they both put a different spin on the message, but the message is still the same. If you compare the literal meaning of both movements without context, they both sound good. After all, "pro" sounds more positive than "anti," because who is against life or against making choices? Both movements have views that are framed from moral and also religious contexts.
For organizations, framing in the media can make a lot of difference. How your target audience and the media perceive and publish your press releases or PR campaigns can have a lot of impact. So it's important to apply framing in content marketing and PR. By consciously thinking about how you communicate, you can steer the media and your audience in the right direction. Two examples of framing in the media:
Albert Heijn introduced the misfits in 2014. These are bags of fruits and vegetables that look "different" but are still fine for use. The word "misfits" evokes a form of pity, because misfits are excluded. By capitalizing on this sentiment, Albert Heijn was able to sell something they wouldn't normally do. The media picked up on this well and used responsibility framing to encourage the target audience to purchase these misfits. Thus, the mavericks became a success through media framing.
After investigation by the Keuringsdienst van waarde it turned out that it was actually not so pathetic at all. When this research came out, the idea of responsibility framing immediately took a turn for the worse for the supermarket chain.
Another example of framing in the media is the British royal family. The way the British media talk about Meghan Markle is a current example. For example, Meghan's love of avocados was linked to human rights violations. This is because avocados are grown under poor environmental and human conditions. Kate Middleton ate avocados as a remedy for her morning sickness. There was nothing else wrong with that. In this you can clearly see that a different way of framing is used with both royals.
In PR, it is important that you correctly articulate what you want to say. Even more important is how you want to say it. Words are very powerful so choose them carefully. The same goes for the images and statistics you share.
If you decide to employ framing, include these three points:
You want your frame to evoke an emotion in your target audience. To do this, identify the common values of your target audience and organization and deploy them. This will make it easier for your target audience to empathize with your message.
Use reliable sources and statistics. If you don't, then it is fake or incomplete news.
Framing should be recognizable to your target audience. That's how you create more credibility.
Framing need not be used as excessively as in the examples mentioned, it often goes unnoticed as well. It can be very subtle aspects that change and direct the meaning of your subject. By formulating a message slightly differently, your message can get a completely different setting and reaction. So it really is in the details. Just pay attention when you read the newspaper or watch the news. After reading this blog, you will notice more often when framing is applied in the media.
