Folding, spindeling, and mutilating lauguage for fun since Aug, 2004
Wednesday, 18 April 2007

ERV points out that "framing" is inadequate with some audiences and in some situations, such as dealing with the Discovery Institute on
"their" turf
.  This is because they cheat.

If Framing is a screw driver, you can't be sucessful with it in situations that call for a hammer.

You don't engage in a "framing" debate at a Discovery Institute event where the only purpose of having a counter argument is to bring in big names to add legitamacy to the event.  No matter how well you "frame" your argument, it's not going to have much effect when you have fifteen  minutes and the Discovery Institute has a couple of days.  As ERV pointed out, a Q&A that only allows students to ask screened questions is also not helpful.

In a closed system, this would be a disaster.  However, getting those facts out to any media coverage on the event would be a good start.

That's framing.

The Discovery Institute "frames" this event as a debate.  We need to get the word out that it is a sham.  Use analogies to sporting events.  The Discovery Institute is holding a track meet, invites world class atheletes, and then only allows them to run if they agree to run while wearing fat suits.  This is so their people can "win" and say they beat world-class athletes.

When the world-class athletes turn down the invitation, the Discovery Institute can say "they're afraid" when it is the Discovery Institute that is afraid of fair competition.

John Q public is going to say "Huh.  I don't blame them.  I wouldn't go to a track meet and run in a fat suit either."

Right now, if you get into an evolution debate with a rank-and-file creationist, they spew every single Discovery Institute talking point down to the punctuation.  But when you say "Oh, the Discovery Institute" they say "who's that?"

Now, when they hear something from the Discovery Institute, they are going to say "Oh.  Those are the guys who can't handle fair competition with their ideas. " and go in search of other information.

They still might be creationists, but at least their sense of fairness won't let them use DI talking points whereas before they were unaware of even where that information was coming from.


Wednesday, 18 April 2007 05:49:45 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00) | Comments [1] |  |  | #
Wednesday, 18 April 2007 08:12:55 (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00)
But the other issue here is that people don't understand that you need a huge scaffolding of knowledge to get to the point where you can say something like "Scientists debate, the Discovery Institute stages them."

You build this by using that kind of phrase again, and again and again with the supporting information. Sometimes you use the fat suit metaphor, sometimes you say they screen questions, sometimes you show how they don't answer questions put to them. But you always need to get back to the "Staged debate theme". That is the frame you build.
Comments are closed.
Admin Login
Sign In
Pick a theme: