<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Bishop Enters the Framing Shop . . .</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2012/02/21/a-bishop-enters-the-framing-shop/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2012/02/21/a-bishop-enters-the-framing-shop/</link>
	<description>A First Things Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2013 02:58:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Blake</title>
		<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2012/02/21/a-bishop-enters-the-framing-shop/comment-page-1/#comment-60505</link>
		<dc:creator>Blake</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2012 23:26:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/?p=39977#comment-60505</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&lt;i&gt;The idea of “framing an issue” sounds rather nefarious to me. How about “discerning the principles and priorities at stake in an issue”. &lt;/i&gt;

&quot;Framing&quot; refers to how a thing is to be presented.

Pick any controversial topic and you will notice that MSNBC will &quot;frame&quot; (present) that issue in ways that highlight Democratic party talking points, while Fox will &quot;frame&quot; the same issue in ways that highlight Republican party talking points.

Abortion: &quot;reproductive freedom&quot; vs. &quot;rights of the unborn&quot;

Gay marriage: &quot;marriage equality&quot; vs. &quot;defending the family from assault&quot;

HHS mandate: &quot;Women&#039;s health&quot; vs. &quot;right to religious conscience&quot;

And so on.

How a question is framed can indeed influence actual voting behavior. Also, how a question is set up makes a difference in poll results, as well.

Which details you recognize or even choose to emphasize, which you minimize or even neglect to mention - that is what people mean when they speak of &quot;framing&quot;.

Or think of the witch from Stephen Sondheim&#039;s &quot;Into The Woods&quot;, at that point in the second act when the narrator argues desperately that if they choose him as the sacrificial victim, they&#039;ll never know how the story turns out: &quot;Some of us don&#039;t like the way you&#039;ve been &lt;i&gt;telling&lt;/i&gt; it....&quot;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>The idea of “framing an issue” sounds rather nefarious to me. How about “discerning the principles and priorities at stake in an issue”. </i></p>
<p>&#8220;Framing&#8221; refers to how a thing is to be presented.</p>
<p>Pick any controversial topic and you will notice that MSNBC will &#8220;frame&#8221; (present) that issue in ways that highlight Democratic party talking points, while Fox will &#8220;frame&#8221; the same issue in ways that highlight Republican party talking points.</p>
<p>Abortion: &#8220;reproductive freedom&#8221; vs. &#8220;rights of the unborn&#8221;</p>
<p>Gay marriage: &#8220;marriage equality&#8221; vs. &#8220;defending the family from assault&#8221;</p>
<p>HHS mandate: &#8220;Women&#8217;s health&#8221; vs. &#8220;right to religious conscience&#8221;</p>
<p>And so on.</p>
<p>How a question is framed can indeed influence actual voting behavior. Also, how a question is set up makes a difference in poll results, as well.</p>
<p>Which details you recognize or even choose to emphasize, which you minimize or even neglect to mention &#8211; that is what people mean when they speak of &#8220;framing&#8221;.</p>
<p>Or think of the witch from Stephen Sondheim&#8217;s &#8220;Into The Woods&#8221;, at that point in the second act when the narrator argues desperately that if they choose him as the sacrificial victim, they&#8217;ll never know how the story turns out: &#8220;Some of us don&#8217;t like the way you&#8217;ve been <i>telling</i> it&#8230;.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tadd</title>
		<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2012/02/21/a-bishop-enters-the-framing-shop/comment-page-1/#comment-60407</link>
		<dc:creator>tadd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2012 17:55:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/?p=39977#comment-60407</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The idea of &quot;framing an issue&quot; sounds rather nefarious to me.  How about &quot;discerning the principles and priorities at stake in an issue&quot;.  The first sounds very manipulative, the second sounds like the normal process of reasoning.  

Are the two phrases essential the same, or am I simply &quot;framing the issue&quot; by my distinction?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The idea of &#8220;framing an issue&#8221; sounds rather nefarious to me.  How about &#8220;discerning the principles and priorities at stake in an issue&#8221;.  The first sounds very manipulative, the second sounds like the normal process of reasoning.  </p>
<p>Are the two phrases essential the same, or am I simply &#8220;framing the issue&#8221; by my distinction?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aaron</title>
		<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2012/02/21/a-bishop-enters-the-framing-shop/comment-page-1/#comment-60382</link>
		<dc:creator>Aaron</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2012 05:52:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/?p=39977#comment-60382</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[@Mike Melandez - Agreed, at the hands of those who champion &quot;choice&quot; the unborn person has no choice at all in his or her fate . . .]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Mike Melandez &#8211; Agreed, at the hands of those who champion &#8220;choice&#8221; the unborn person has no choice at all in his or her fate . . .</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike Melendez</title>
		<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2012/02/21/a-bishop-enters-the-framing-shop/comment-page-1/#comment-60377</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike Melendez</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2012 03:33:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/?p=39977#comment-60377</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Also sad as it&#039;s purpose seems to be to confuse the issue. Pro-choice is not about choice.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Also sad as it&#8217;s purpose seems to be to confuse the issue. Pro-choice is not about choice.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jane</title>
		<link>http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2012/02/21/a-bishop-enters-the-framing-shop/comment-page-1/#comment-60366</link>
		<dc:creator>Jane</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Feb 2012 00:00:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/?p=39977#comment-60366</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Framing is central to what they call &quot;strategic communications.&quot;  I once attended a workshop on this topic with a Harvard professor who presented a case study on the crafting of the &quot;pro-choice&quot; idea based on the very mixed opinion data on abortion in the early 1980s.  People did not have to take the step of considering themselves &quot;pro-abortion&quot; - they just had to agree to be &quot;pro-choice.&quot; Frankly, very chilling on how powerful framing can be.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Framing is central to what they call &#8220;strategic communications.&#8221;  I once attended a workshop on this topic with a Harvard professor who presented a case study on the crafting of the &#8220;pro-choice&#8221; idea based on the very mixed opinion data on abortion in the early 1980s.  People did not have to take the step of considering themselves &#8220;pro-abortion&#8221; &#8211; they just had to agree to be &#8220;pro-choice.&#8221; Frankly, very chilling on how powerful framing can be.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
