This installment from The Winning Words Project covers how to think about re-framing tweets to avoid using and repeating right wing frames. Using right wing frames and having them re-tweeted potentially hundreds of times, actually conditions us to think using right wing frames instead of our own.
As described in "The Debunking Handbook" by John Cook of the Global Change Institute, University of Queensland and Stephan Lewandowsky with the School of Psychology, University of Western Australia:
To test for [the] backfire effect, people were shown a flyer that debunked common myths about flu vaccines. Afterwards, they were asked to separate the myths from the facts. When asked immediately after reading the flyer, people successfully identified the myths. However, when queried 30 minutes after reading the flyer, some people actually scored worse after reading the flyer. The debunking reinforced the myths.
Hence the backfire effect is real. The driving force is the fact that familiarity increases the chances of accepting information as true. Immediately after reading the flyer, people remembered the details that debunked the myth and successfully identified the myths. As time passed, however, the memory of the details faded and all people remembered was the myth without the “tag” that identified it as false.
Social media is now among the most referenced sources for news and information in the world, quickly overtaking traditional media outlets. Ordinary citizens broke the news of the raid on Osama bin Laden's compound and Whitney Houston's death. This makes each and every one of us who participates in social media, a critical component in information dissemination—nearly as important as any cable news commentator or newspaper editor.
We, the people, are finally in a position to shape the message instead of having it spoon-fed to us with what has been long-standing conservative media bias. This makes it extremely important that we get the message right.
So how do we do that? Let's look at some examples after the squiggly ...
Starting with this tweet ...
What stands out here?
President Obama Double Our National Debt EXCELLENT.
The juxtaposition of President Obama and doubling our national debt—even if it's in question form—is certainly not the connection we want people to have in their memory, not the least because it isn't true. So how could this tweet have been written using a better frame? Looking at the linked article (which is filled with "don'ts" when it comes to progressive message framing, by the way!), we find this:
"[O]f the $5.1 trillion added to the National Debt from 2009 to 2012, only $1.5 trillion is due [to] legislation signed by President Obama. Of that $1.5 trillion, only $500 billion in incremental spending carries past 2010. The rest of the debt, or $3.6 trillion, can be directly attributed to legislation passed under previous administrations."
What if this was tweeted instead?
What stands out in that tweet? Bush legislation National Debt Increase. Much, much better, no? Not a single thing that could be misconstrued, or misremembered, as Obama increasing the national debt!
Let's look at another example.
The unintended take-away?
Governor Walker, Defender of Freedom. But is Governor Walker a defender of freedom? More importantly, is that what this person meant to portray with this tweet? Absolutely not! Governor Walker is near the top of the list of governors with the worst record ever on defending workers' freedom to collectively bargain and women's freedom to have sovereign control over their own bodies. And as a more thorough reading of the tweet would imply, the twitter user is a union supporter opposing Governor Walker.
So how could this have been "framed" to make the actual point this person intended to make? Like this:
Now there's no doubt that the lasting impression will be "Governor Walker, Denier of Freedom." There are no words in this tweet that a reader could come away remembering in a positive light about Walker. Phrased the other way, a positive impression of Governor Walker is most likely what will be recalled later in the reader's mind, because in spite of the subsequent tags, that's what it actually says.
Now take a look at this tweet. What does it actually say?
The very first thing it announces is that the GOP has a plan to save Medicare. Sure, it goes on to say that it will cost "a fortune," but according to the way this is written, it's a plan to "save" Medicare. The person who tweeted this intended to portray the complete opposite. It's clear from a deeper reading of the tweet, including clicking on and reading the linked article.
But we have to remember that the majority of tweets just fly by on our screens with only a moment to make an impression on the brain of the reader. That makes it absolutely critical that we frame our messages with exactly the imprint we want to leave in people's minds. Did this person mean to say that the GOP plans to "save medicare"? No, they did not. But that's what they accidentally said, nonetheless. This is what they meant to say:
So when you're ready to compose a tweet, or have clicked on an article that pre-fills the tweet for you, it's really important to read it over carefully and consider the following things:
- What words stand out most prominently, and would those words evoke positive or negative feelings or impressions?
- Can you rephrase the tweet to say the same thing using Progressive frames instead of right wing frames?
- Does the pre-set headline tell the story you want it to tell? If not, don't use it. Just because a site suggests that text doesn't mean you have to use it.
- Are you using "Winning Words" with progressive moral frames? Are you talking about Obama's successes? Are you reminding people how the Patient Protection Act protects their health, their pocketbook and their freedom? Are you firmly establishing the fact that Medicare and Social Security are earned benefits? Are you promoting the economic reality that government spending is an investment in our future (education, infrastructure, research) that actually returns a profit for the country?
If you have a tweet you'd like assistance rephrasing, let us know in the comments section below.