Citation
The Effects of positively framed goals on movement outcomes and public policies : consistency and continuity through frame structure

Material Information

Title:
The Effects of positively framed goals on movement outcomes and public policies : consistency and continuity through frame structure
Creator:
Gibbins, Peter
Place of Publication:
Denver, Colo.
Publisher:
Metropolitan State University of Denver
Publication Date:
Language:
English

Record Information

Source Institution:
Metropolitan State University of Denver
Holding Location:
Auraria Library
Rights Management:
Copyright [name of copyright holder or Creator or Publisher as appropriate]. Permission granted to University of Colorado Denver to digitize and display this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text
The Effects of Positively Framed Goals on Movement Outcomes and Public Policies: Consistency and Continuity Through Frame Structure by Peter Gibbins
An undergraduate thesis submitted in partial completion of the Metropolitan State University of Denver Honors Program
May 2015
Dr. Sheila Rucki
Dr. Andrew Thangasamy
Dr. Megan Hughes-Zarzo
Primary Advisor
Second Reader
Honors Program Director


The Effects of Positively Framed Goals on Movement Outcomes and Public Policies: Consistency and Continuity Through Frame Structure
by Peter Gibbins
Abstract:
Framing and social movement theorists have long been able to describe frame types and explain framing effects on a case-by-case basis. Policy scholars have similarly studied problem definition theory and its implications for public policies. However, there are very limited discussions as to how certain frame types may contribute to successful outcomes more than others. The author suggests issues can be framed positively and negatively, and that positive frames are more conducive to successful movements or public policies. A limited test of William Gamsons The Strategy of Social Protest dataset fails to reveal a statistically significant relationship between positive goal frames and movement outcomes.


1
Introduction:
The visibility of social movements has increased considerably in recent years.
On the Left alone, weve seen the Occupy Wall Street movement dramatically enter and exit the scene, while other movements have ascended to various degrees including movements dealing with homeless rights, environmental concerns, LGBTQ rights, government surveillance, and perhaps most dramatically, the #BlackLivesMatter movement which has recently captured the nations attention. An uptick in social movement organization (SMO) activity is juxtaposed with, and largely a response to, an unprecedented level of political dysfunction in Washington, DC which borders on paralysis in some of our political institutions, particularly Congress. No longer willing to rely on political institutions as a means to have their voices heard, a growing number of Americans are turning to SMOs as an alternative way to influence policy.
To the extent more Americans are engaging in social movement activism, the ways in which SMOs influence public policy needs to be examined. While this is hardly a new topic, I will propose an added way of considering the frames or problem definitions SMOs adopt. I will also argue that the frames that are adopted to mobilize individuals, influence public opinion, change the agenda, and spur public officials into action have the potential of significantly affecting policy outcomes years down the road not just by bringing about change, but by limiting the change that is possible within the boundaries established by adopted frames. In short, adopting a particular frame for short term gains may have unintended long term consequences. Finally, I will conduct a simple test to see if particular types of frames are more conducive for social movement suc-
cess.


2
Framing Theory, Problem Definition, and Policy Outcomes
Frames are ways in which we organize our thoughts and ideas about the world around us. In communication, frames allow us to speak to the deep-seated beliefs, values, and perceptions in our audience by highlighting select aspects of an issue. Sociologist David Snow, one of the foremost social movement and framing scholars, describes frames thusly:
Collective action frames, like picture frames, focus attention by punctuating or specifying what in our sensual field is relevant and what is irrelevant, what is in frame and what is out of frame, in relation to the object of orientation.1
By using frames to highlight or obscure particular facets of an issue, we can impact the way individuals perceive an issue and how they feel about it which, in the realm of politics and policy, ultimately affects their policy preferences. For example, if a small community were confronted by a hate group that wanted to lead a march down Main Street, the way in which the question of whether or not to allow the march is framed for citizens might impact their policy preferences. If people presented this situation as relating to or impacting free speech rights, people might support allowing the march to continue even though they might find the views of the hate group repugnant. Conversely, if the situation were presented as posing a potential threat to public safety because the hate group uses violent rhetoric, those same people might oppose the march despite their belief in free speech.
1 Snow, David, Framing Processes, Ideology, and Discursive Fields, The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements, ed. by Snow, David, Soule, Sarah, and Kriesi, Hanspeter (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004) pp 380-412, p 384


3
Frames are usually considered to have three components, often analyzed as individual frames in and of themselves: diagnosis, prognosis, and resonance.2 Diagnostic framing consists of defining the problem at hand. It often, though not always, involves assigning blame or responsibility to a particular person, group, or institution, and diagnostic frames consistently invoke a shared value. Many scholars refer to the use of injustice frames in diagnostic framing which, as one would expect, highlight the injustice of a given problem as it relates to a particular group in society; injustice frames attempt to appeal to commonly held notions of what is and is not just.3 A very recent example would be the #BlackLivesMatter movements protests in Baltimore which called for Justice for Freddie Gray.
Adversarial and boundary framing in diagnostic frames attempt to delineate between a target constituency and some different, external other.4 These frames cast actors as protagonists and antagonists and can present a problem as being a battle of good versus evil. At its worst, this type of frame can be utilized to drum up hatred against a weak group in society; Hitlers vilification of the Jews and other political and ethnic groups which then led to the Holocaust comes to mind. Returning to #Black-LivesMatter, some activists have invoked frames casting police as the enemy, a use of
2 Marullo, Sam, Pagnucco, Ron, and Smith, Jackie, Frame Changes and Social Movement Contraction:
US Peace Movement Framing After the Cold War, Sociological Inquiry 66:1 (February 1996) pp
1-28, p 2
3 Carrol, WK and Ratner, RS, Master Frames and Counter-Hegemony: Political Sensibilities in
Contemporary Social Movements, Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 33, 1996. pp 407-435
4 Silver, Ira, Constructing Social ChangeThrough Philanthropy: Boundary Framing and the Articulation
of Vocabularies of Motives for Social Movement Participation, Sociological Inquiry 67 (1997) pp 488-503


4
the adversarial frame which is fundamentally and functionally different from the aforementioned injustice frames used in the same movement.
Prognosis framing or prognostic frames further the definition of the problem including the assignment of responsibility, but they then suggest solutions to the problem. In their case study of a debate regarding the placement of a radioactive waste facility in South Korea, Minah Kang and Jiho Jang describe an interesting use of prognosis framing by the Korean government.5 With environmentalists casting the placement of a waste facility as environmentally hazardous, the government used prognostic framing as a counter-frame to co-opt and undermine the environmentalists position. The government reframed the problem as not having to do with the placement of a new facility, but as pertaining to the condition of existing facilities. Existing facilities were approaching their capacity which was framed as being environmentally hazardous. This allowed the construction of the new facility to be framed as being environmentally responsible as it would solve the problem of existing facilities becoming dangerously full.
Resonance refers to the extent to which the frame gains traction and effectively mobilizes people or influences public opinion in the manner intended.6 Resonance is closely intertwined with the perception of an SMOs tactics. As Benford and Snow explain, an SMOs actions must be consistent with the frame being put forth:
...inconsistency can manifest itself in two ways: in terms of apparent contradictions among beliefs or claims; and in terms of perceived contradictions
5 Kang, Minah and Jang, Jiho, NIMBY or NIABY? Who Defines a Policy Problem and Why: Analysis of
Framing in Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility Placement in South Korea. Asia Pacific Viewpoint 54:1 (April 2013) pp 49-60, p 54
6 Benford, Robert A. and Snow, David A., Framing Processes and Social Movements: An Overview and
Assessment. Annual Review of Sociology 26 (2000) pp 611-639, pp 619-620.


5
among framings and tactical actions (as between what an SMO says and what it does).7
For example, an SMO that uses nonviolent frames will see its frames resonance diminished if it then engages in violence actions. The greater the inconsistencies between frame and actions, the less resonance a frame has.
A key aspect of resonance includes the way in which a frame invokes deeply held cultural values. Zuo and Benford analyzed the cultural resonance of frames in their case study of Chinas pro-democracy protests in 1989.8 Student activists knew that their protests would be cast as anti-revolutionary and traitorous by the inevitable counter-framing from the communist government. The students deliberately made appeals to long-held Chinese values of nationalism and Confucianism in their frames while also invoking communist ideals. The extreme resonance of their frames allowed their message to spread far and wide despite the students limited access to networks of communication, i.e. media outlets or existing SMOs. And, as hoped, the governments counter-framing failed because the government crackdown was so blatantly inconsistent with the traditional values that the students put forth. The governments invocation of those same values was completely ineffective in the face of their own gross inconsistencies.
Master frames are larger frames that are shared by or encompass many different SMOs, though their definition has been the subject of debate. Benford and Snows development of this concept is as follows:
7 ibid, p 620
8 Zuo, Ziping and Benford, Robert, Mobilization Processes and the 1989 Chinese Democracy
Movement, The Sociological Quarterly 36:1 (January 1995) pp 131-156


6
[Master frames] perform the same function as movement specific collective action frames, but they do so on a larger scale. In other words, they are also modes of punctuation, attribution, and articulation, but their punctuations, attributions, and articulations may color and constrain those of any number of movement organizations.9
Civil Rights or equal rights were part of the master frame defining the civil rights
movement which encompassed a large number of SMOs. Emerging SMOs adopting
this master frame would have their positions be both characterized and limited by that
overarching frame. However, some take issue with this conception of master frames in
that it describes what they are overarching frames that unite clusters of related SMOs -
but it fails to account for how they come to be. William Swart offers this answer, using
the civil rights master frame as an example:
...civil rights was a master frame during the 1960s, not because it was utilized by a diversity of social movements but because of its cultural resonance with the postwar optimism over the successful defense of freedom, equality, and democracy. The rhetoric of rights.. .provided powerful symbolic tenets that a diversity of movements could use in defining and expressing grievances and goals.. .movement actors utilize the master frames generated by prior movements because they represent successful and culturally potent ideational themes.10
In other words, particularly resonant frames which persist and prove successful are adopted by growing numbers of SMOs to become master frames.
Ultimately, a principal use of frames by SMOs is to mobilize a target constituency into action. To do so, SMOs must somehow connect their frame to the existing grievances or desires of an as-of-yet unorganized population. The process of connecting an
9 Snow, David and Benford, Robert, Master Frames and Cycles of Protest. Frontiers in Social
Movement Theory ed. by Mueller, Carol McClung and Morris, Aldon D. (New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press, 1992) pp 133-155, p 138
10 Swart, William J., The League of Nations and the Irish Question: Master Frames, Cycles of Protest,
and Master Frame Alignment, The Sociological Quarterly 36:3 (Summer 1995) pp 465-481, p 469


7
individuals existing ideas, which are likely not conceptualized as frames at first, to a frame being utilized by an SMO, is called frame bridging.11 In addition to frame bridging, SMOs also engage in frame amplification to increase mobilization and a frames resonance. Amplification is generally classified as value amplification or belief amplification. In an American context, values might include ideals of equality or the Jeffersonian triad of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, whereas beliefs might include a commonly held belief in the free markets ability to fuel innovation and generate wealth. Also, beliefs may address the seriousness of the problem, issue, or grievance in question or the locus of causality or blame.12
While much of the literature on framing theory is produced by sociologists, political scientists and policy scholars have also acknowledged the obvious importance language has in shaping debates and, in turn, policy outcomes. Writing on the topic of problem definition, policy scholars David Rochefort and Roger Cobb describe the role of language in problem definition:
The uses of language are crucial to the political analysis of public policy-making and problem definition. Language is essential to understanding, argument, and individual and group expression, which all figure into the definition of social problems for public attention. Language can be the vehicle for employing symbols that lend legitimacy to one definition and undermine the legitimacy of another...13
11 Snow, David, Rochford Jr., E. Burke, Worden, Steven, and Benford, Robert, Frame Alignment
Processes, Micromobilization, and Movement Participation, American Sociological Review51:4 (August 1986) pp 464-481, p 467
12 Ibid., p 470
13 Rochefort, David and Cobb, Roger, Problem Definition: An Emerging Perspective, The Politics of
Problem Definition, ed. by Rochefort, David and Cobb, Roger (Lawrence, KS: Univ. Press of KS, 1994) pp 1-31, p 9


8
Whereas David Snows definition of framing speaks to the way frames highlight particular aspects of an issue by drawing our attention to them and away from another aspect, Rochefort and Cobbs approach in problem definition speaks to the power of words to buttress or undermine particular problem definitions. The importance of this from a policy standpoint cannot be overstated.
The problem of drug abuse is an issue which has captured the publics attention off and on for decades; its rare for an issue to be central in policy discussions for as long as drug abuse has. This is due in part to what problem definition scholars refer to as drama and proximity.14 Proximity refers to the closeness of the issue to individuals in a society. In the case of drug abuse, while most people are not drug addicts, many people are affected by addiction through friends and family members. Drama is just what it sounds like; in the case of drug abuse, violent crimes related to drug trafficking and acute public health issues heighten the drama and immediacy of the issue. The problem of drug abuse has been defined (or framed) as a crime issue and a public health issue, with different presidential administrations favoring one frame over the other, though defining drug abuse as a criminal issue has been dominant in recent decades. This shift in frame has profound implications for proffered solutions. A criminal frame results in increased law enforcement funding, stricter sentencing laws, and now, after decades of the War on Drugs, mass incarceration. A public health frame often results in substantially different solutions including treatment programs, needle exchanges, methadone clinics, and the like. Two different definitions of the same prob-
14
Sharp, Elaine, National Antidrug Policymaking, The Politics of Problem Definition, ed. by Rochefort, David and Cobb, Roger (Lawrence, KS: Univ. Press of KS, 1994) pp 98-116


9
lem yield fundamentally different results. Framing scholars Benford and Snow would explain this as the identification of specific problems and causes...constraining] the range of possible reasonable solutions and strategies advocated.15 Reframe or change your problem definition and a different set of reasonable solutions emerge.
The similarities of framing and problem definition aside, framing scholars tend to look at framing in social movements or, more generally, the public arena. They are less likely to examine framing as it plays out in the halls of government. This is not to say that framing and social movement scholars do not consider how SMOs affect policy, but the effects of frames on policy outcomes are eclipsed by work looking more at relatively short term SMO success. In The Strategies of Social Protest, sociologist William Gam-son examines which SMO strategies are most likely to lead to success, with success being defined as a group gaining acceptance, that is, access to the policy process, or through the gaining of new advantages secured by policy changes.16 Gamsons later works similarly focuses on movement tactics with frames featured as a tool for mobilization. Amenta and Caren offer a similar take on SMO success related to public policy. They present a three level approach regarding access to benefits and collective goods. The best outcome is when a group gains continuing leverage over the policy process, a concept that is similar to Gamsons notion of acceptance. This outcome is important in that long term leverage translates to long term access to benefits and public goods.
The next best outcome is a group gaining access to benefits which will persist until and
15 Benford, Robert A. and Snow, David A., Framing Processes and Social Movements: An Overview and
Assessment. p 616
16 Gamson, William, The Strategy of Social Protest (Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press, 1975)


10
unless countering action is taken. At the minimum, a group may enjoy limited benefits resulting from a single law or decision.17 Again, in this study, to the extent frames are considered, they are considered as mobilizing tools to be strategically employed, not as variable affecting policy outcomes.
Thomas Rochon and David Mazmanian build on Gamsons work by suggesting a third type of movement success: changing values.18 The changing of values should not be overlooked as it is, according to Rochon and Mazmanian, central to agenda setting. Agenda setting is one of the most important ways SMOs can impact the policy process, and its particularly important in terms of frames or problem definitions. Thomas Birk-land identifies agenda setting as the process by which problems and alternative solutions gain or lose public and elite attention.19 Birkland further defines an agenda as follows:
An agenda is a collection of problems, understandings of causes, symbols, solutions, and other elements of public problems that come to the attention of members of the public and their government officials.20
Agenda setting is important in that it is the part of the process where SMO frames can be adopted as problem definitions. It is the point where frames become variables affecting policies themselves.
17 Amenta, Edwin and Caren, Neal, The Legislative, Organizational, and Beneficiary Consequences of
State-Oriented Challengers, The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements, ed. by Snow, David, Soule, Sarah, and Kriesi, Hanspeter (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004) pp 461-488, p 465
18 Rochon, Thomas and Mazmanian, Daniel, Social Movements and the Policy Process, Annals of
American Academy of Political and Social Science 528 (July 1993) pp75-87, p 77
19 Birkland, Thomas, Agenda Setting in Public Policy, Handbook of Public Policy Analysis, ed. by
Fischer, Frank, Miller, Gerald, and Sidney, Sara (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2007) p 63
20
Ibid.


11
With this string of concepts, we can begin to see how the frames initially crafted by an SMO for the purpose of mobilizing a population can persist over time to become the problem definitions around which policy is made. As such, we can construct a simple model of SMO driven policy change:
1. An SMO begins to form around a particular issue. SMO members begin to construct frames for the purpose of organizing and mobilizing a target constituency into action.
2. An SMO engages in frame bridging to mobilize the constituency.
3. The SMO grows and the developing frame increases in resonance.
4. The SMOs resonant frame gains the attention of other SMOs working on similar issues. The original frame becomes a master frame for multiple SMOs.
5. A large social movement operating under a shared master frame utilizes strategies consistent with the master frame to effectively influence policy makers; one or many of the SMOs either gain acceptance and access to the policy process and/or change the agenda to reflect the policy preferences of the SMOs constituencies.
6. The SMOs master frame is added to the policy agenda and modified as a problem definition. Policy makers design and implement solutions constrained by the definition provided.
7. Constituents now enjoy the results of new policies crafted around the frames originally used to mobilize them, and new desires and grievances are formed around which new SMOs will rise.
I would argue from my own professional experience that movement organizers rarely consider the implications of the frames they adopt beyond step 5, and most orga-


12
nizers dont even expect that their particular SMO will make it to step 3 or 4. Its certainly understandable, given the many challenges that SMOs face, that many people are unable to consider the long term implications of adopted frames. However, if organizers knew that certain types of frames would help or at least not hurt their chances at short term success while simultaneously allowing for better outcomes over the long term, I suspect they would be more than happy to adjust their framing practices accordingly. Positive and Negative Goals
Much of framing and definition literature focuses on how specific frames were employed in specific situations, yet there is little to suggest that particular types of frames can or should be consistently employed to achieve consistent results. That being said, some movement leaders have insisted on the use of particular types of frames, though they didnt necessarily describe them as such. Writing in his seminal pamphlet Hind Swaraj, published in the pages of his newspaper, Indian Opinion, in 1909, Mohandas Gandhi would insist that the goals of the Indian independence movement needed to be framed in a particular fashion. Specific to independence, it was not enough for Indians to rid India of the British. Simply driving the British from India could easily lead to a new, Indian-led tyranny. He believed that Indians needed to set out to create a new, just India. Decolonization could be viewed as a necessary step towards a just India, but it was hardly the end goal.21
Gandhi's broader goal of creating a more just India included very specific articulations of what a just India would look like. It was not, notably, the parliamentary system
21
Gandhi, Mohandas K., Hind Swaraj or Indian Home Rule, first published in Indian Opinion, December 11 and 18, 1909, translated by Mahadev Desai (Lexington, KY: pothi.com, 2013) p 122


13
Indians eventually opted for. (Also in Hind Swaraj, Gandhi famously likened the British parliament to a whore.)22 His goal of a more just India is what I would describe as a positive goal. His goal included the creation of something new, something to be worked for or towards. Conversely, those in the independence movement working to simply drive the British out were focused on a negative goal, that is, there was something they were working against, the British colonial system, or there was a condition, being colonized, that they were trying to end. Again, it's important to note that regarding decolonization, Gandhi considered it a likely necessary pre-condition for a just India, but he entertained the possibility, perhaps only for the sake of argument, that a just India was possible under British rule. The Indians could describe the type of society they wished to live in. If the British were willing and able to provide a system of governance that allowed for Indians to live in a just society, why bother with fighting to drive them out?23 As unlikely as this was, the suggestion was intended to highlight a pitfall to thinking in negative terms. One may end up fighting battles one doesnt need to fight; One may end up tilting at windmills. Perhaps even worse, actions taken in service of a negatively framed goal may have negative, unintended consequences for society.
This idea of positively framed goals, though Gandhi himself does not describe them as such, is central to philosophies of nonviolence. Later in Hind Swaraj, Gandhi proposes a connection between the means and the ends upon which nonviolent philosophies hinge:
22 Ibid., p 44
23
Ibid., p 93


14
The means may be likened to a seed, the end to a tree; and there is just the same inviolable connection between the means and the end as there is between the seed and the tree. ...We reap exactly as we sow.
He goes on to say that fair means alone can produce fair results.. ,24 It follows then, that if the means and ends are inseparable, one must have a clear idea of the intended end in order to settle on appropriate means. One must have a clearly articulated positive goal. I would add that this concept of an inseparable means and ends dovetails easily with framing theorists observation that a frames resonance depends on an SMO acting in accordance with the frame it puts forth.
Gandhi offers up other reasons for adopting positively framed goals as well. When advocating for his constructive program, his 17-point plan for the creation of a new just India, Gandhi presents a metaphor for pursuing social change. He proposes that if ones house were in such disrepair that it needed to be replaced entirely, it would be ill-advised to start by tearing down the existing house. This would be akin to pursuing a negatively framed goal. In eliminating a particular thing, one might be unprepared to deal with the problems the absence of that thing would bring. Instead, he suggests that before tearing down the house, a new house should be planned for and built. If needed, one can build one room at a time and incorporate useful elements from the old house. Eventually, a new, adequate house will stand, and the inadequate house will be no more.25
24 Ibid., p 96
25 Sharp, Gene, Gandhi as a Political Strategist with Essays on Ethics and Politics (Boston: Porter
Sargent Publishers, 1979) pp 80-81


15
Though this metaphor, like many of Gandhis rhetorical devices, may come off as overly simple or folksy, it speaks to very real pitfalls he was consciously trying to avoid.
In the case of Indian independence, if the British left in response to an independence movement before the Indians had developed some plan of how they would govern themselves after a century of rule by the British Raj, the resulting power vacuum and political instability would prove disastrous. In recent times, the US invaded Iraq to topple Saddam Hussein, and despite all the rhetoric about nation building and bringing democracy to the Middle East, we focused on the negative goal of removing Saddam. Our attempts to impose a new power structure on the country after the fact proved inadequate and disastrous. We tore down the first house too soon, if we shouldve torn it down at all. Similar critiques could be made of the Egyptian Revolution or the US intervention in Libya.
This distinction between positive and negatively framed goals is explored through the work of later Gandhian thinkers. Writing on Gandhis intellectual influence on traditions outside of civil disobedience, peace studies scholar Thomas Weber explains Johan Galtungs Gandhian approach to peace studies. In American traditions, peace was often thought of simply as the absence of war, however this conception is inherently negative, and it leaves room for any number of ills to persist in peacetime. Galtung insisted on the adoption of a positive conception of peace. Such a conception would go on to address indirect forms of violence, i.e. structural violence, which can persist in the absence of war.26
26 Weber, Thomas, Gandhi, Deep Ecology, Peace Research and Buddhist Economics, Journal of Peace Research 36:3 (May 1999) pp 349-361, p 354


16
This positive conception of peace championed by Galtung would make its way into the framing literature. Writing on the contraction of the US peace movement after the Cold War and the perceived success of the first Gulf War, Marullo, Pagnucco, and Smith observed that peace based SMOs began adopting positively expressed frames around peace in the tradition of Galtung; they identify the positive peace frame as having four components: promoting social justice, supporting human rights, protecting the environment, and seeking economic rather than military foreign aid.27 This is in stark contrast to the negative frames employed during the Cold War, namely anti-interventionist and anti-nuclear frames. Once the Cold War ended, anti-nuclear frames no longer resonated. Anti-interventionist frames lost currency for a number of reasons. Some people felt that the Gulf War was a successful intervention, while naysayers were forced to acknowledge that international institutions werent up to the task of limiting state behavior to peaceful ends, undermining many of the arguments central to the anti-interventionist frame. Beyond that, many people naively assumed that the end of the Cold War would spell the end of foreign interventions in all but the most extreme circumstances. Facing a crisis of relevancy as the conditions they were opposed to ceased to be issues, peace SMOs transformed their frames. Marullo, Pagnucco and Smiths research showed that in the early 90s among peace SMOs only positive frames increased in use while the use of negative, that is anti frames decreased or stayed the same.28
27 Marullo, Sam, Pagnucco, Ron, and Smith, Jackie, Frame Changes and Social Movement Contraction: US Peace Movement Framing After the Cold War, p 13
28 Ibid.


17
Sinha and Gasper directly address the framing of Gandhi and his American torch-bearer, Martin Luther King, Jr. In describing the framing techniques used by both, they highlight what was done well including the use of frames that I identify as positive, though Sinha and Gasper dont explicitly describe them as such. Both Gandhi and King used value amplification by adopting the values of both their own native groups or cultures as well as the values of their targets the British and American Whites making counter framing very difficult for potential opponents. While appealing to British and American values, they completely refrained from assigning blame on specific individuals or groups, skillfully avoiding any sort of negative, adversarial frame. During the Salt March, for example, Gandhi condemned the Salt Tax itself as evil but offered no condemnation of the British themselves. They also used frames of equal rights and freedom for all as powerful bridging frames that united various groups. The respective rights frames used by both, said frames being the master frames that persisted throughout their movements, are positive frames dedicated to the creation of new conditions. The article juxtaposes Gandhi and Kings transformational reframing with the negative, adversarial frames deployed as part of an unsuccessful, government effort to address female infanticide in Delhi.29
Policy scholars also recognize the use of negative language in problem definition. It would seem that it is a habit of American presidents to use negative, adversarial frames to target drug addicts, the poor, or groups they intend to tax.30 Chong and
29 Sinha, Manisha and Gasper, Des, How Can Power Discourses be Changed? Contrasting the Daughter Deficit Policy of the Delhi Government with Gandhi and Kings Transformational Re-
framing, Critical Policy Studies 3:3-4 (Oct Dec 2009) pp 290-308
30 Bosso, Christopher J, The Contextual Bases of Problem Definition, The Politics of Problem Definition,
ed. by Rochefort, David and Cobb, Roger (Lawrence, KS: Univ. Press of KS, 1994) pp 182-203


18
Druckman, who also lament the corrosive effects of frames on public opinion and having an informed electorate, note the use of negative frames in casting particular groups in society in a negative light.31 It would seem that most mentions of negative frames present frames that are adversarial frames, though the adversary neednt be a person or group. The war on drugs is a negative frame where the adversary is a thing: drugs.
Though negative and positive frames are clearly mentioned and referred to in the literature, rarely is one considered an alternative to the other, that is, its rare that a scholar in identifying a negative frame would suggest or identify an alternative positive frame that could have or should have been used. Sinha and Gasper stand out in that regard, thought they dont explicitly use the words positive or negative. I, on the other hand, am explicitly suggesting that positive frames are preferable due to specific qualities that are inherent in positive and negative frames independent of their content.
From a policy standpoint, Ill refer back to Gandhian conceptions including positive notions of peace. Like Galtungs positive peace frame, positively framed goals allow for the larger system to be considered and critiqued in ways negative frames dont allow. Using the War on Drugs as an example, had a positive frame been adopted -perhaps a frame emphasizing the public health aspect of the problem through promoting healthy communities the reasonable solutions that frame allows might include better health services and economic opportunities in the poverty-stricken neighborhoods that were particularly ravaged by crack and heroin epidemics in recent decades. Of equal importance is what the positive frame doesnt allow as a reasonable solution:
31 Chong, Dennis and Druckman, James N, Framing Theory, Annual Review of Political Science 10 (2007) pp 103-26


19
over-policing and mass incarceration. Its incredibly difficult for one to seriously suggest that a prison term for a sick person is the best thing to make him or her healthier. Instead, the negative frame was adopted which included viewing drug use as a criminal problem and it used negative, adversarial frames which labeled addicts themselves as criminals. When the problem is about criminals, incarceration becomes a reasonable solution and treatment programs become politically untenable. Furthermore, the negative War on Drugs frame fails to even acknowledge the crushing poverty that fuels both drug use and trafficking, the same structural violence negative peace frames similarly ignore.
When it comes to SMO success, positive and negative frames have organizing implications which are also inherent to their structure. Gerhards and Rucht hypothesize that the larger the range of problems covered by a frame, the larger the range of social groups that can be addressed with the frame and the greater the mobilization capacity of the frame.32 This hypothesis is similar to Sinha and Gaspers observation that King and Gandhis use of broad, rights frames allowed them to appeal to vast swaths of society without explicitly alienating anyone.
Marullo, Pagnucco, and Smith observed that the adoption of positive frames in the peace movement allowed organizations to hold the interest of more devoted members in a time of contraction, though this observation has interesting implications. On one hand, those who were interested in positive frames as a foundation for radical critiques of the existing order stuck around keeping flagging SMOs alive, but its notable
32 Gerhards, Jurgen and Rucht, Dieter, Mesomobilization: Organizing and Framing in Two Protest
Campaigns in West Germany, American Journal of Sociology 98:3 (Nov 1992) pp 555-596, p 580


20
that SMOs didnt adopt positive frames at the movements height. One could infer that positive frames perhaps could not be adopted when the movement saw more participation and ideological diversity. Perhaps it is easier for a large number of people to agree that something is bad, whereas agreeing on positively framed solutions might prove difficult. In the case of a peace movement, a lot of people really dont like war. If one shifts to a positive frame with its critiques of structural violence and solutions that may clash with many peoples ideologies, participation might drop off.
At the same time, many negative frames are adversarial in nature which presents its own pitfalls for SMOs. When politicians adopt negative, adversarial frames, they often target a weak, unpopular group in society to curry favor with a more powerful constituency. In so doing, they can use the negative frame to leverage support for various policy prescriptions. Frankly, presidents can use the bully pulpit to beat up on drug addicts all day long and still win elections and policy fights. SMOs operate under different power dynamics. At least initially, many SMOs, particularly grassroots ones, have little in the way of resources or power. Otherwise, they wouldnt have to resort to grassroots organizing. The adoption of a negative, adversarial frame would likely pit the SMO against a more powerful group. William Gamson identifies the extent to which an SMO attempts to destroy or replace its target as a factor governing success. SMOs which target the antagonist as something to be replaced have significantly lower chances of success, possibly due in part to the more significant response it draws from the more powerful antagonist.33 This same conflict, though not entirely avoidable, is less likely with the adoption of a positive frame. Groups could also follow Gandhis use of a larger,
33 Gamson, William, The Strategy of Social Protest (Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press, 1975) p 65


21
positive master frame combined with a very targeted, non-adversarial negative frame which is limited to a single issue as he did in condemning the salt tax as unjust without condemning those who enacted the tax.
Nepal Mahila Ekata Samaj (NMES) utilizes this very framing tactic to great effect in Kathmandu, Nepal. NMES started when a small number of women living in informal settlements in Kathmandu began saving a few rupees a month that they managed to save from striking harder bargains when shopping for vegetables at local markets. The savings were combined to form a fledgling savings and micro-financing co-op. NMES has since grown into a larger organization that not only boasts a credit cooperative with over $100,000 in assets, but also an inter-community network and organizing program that coordinates public demonstrations, advocates on landless issues to the government and the broader community, offers trainings to landless women, and provides basic services.
NMES's vision is for a "prosperous society that is economically equitable, culturally plural, socially equal and inclusive is very similar to positive peace frames.34 The organization's mission is for landless women to live a dignified life with access to secure shelter.35 In service of the mission, the women of NMES have adopted a set of goals, which are as follows (the following are edited and paraphrased from NMES writings):
Organize landless women throughout Nepal.
Develop the capacity of landless women to ensure a dignified life in Nepali society.
Develop ways to function effectively in the face of forced evictions and for the elimination of domestic violence.
34 Nepal Mahila Ekata Samaj, "About Us," http://mahilaekata.org/about-us/. retrieved 4/25/15
35 Ibid.


22
Strengthen existing networks, both within and between squatter communities, to address issues related to women's rights, housing rights, and land rights.
Educate landless women about their rights and advocate for landless rights in public policy.
Develop proper advocacy programs to make authorities aware of issues impacting landless women.36
All of these goals connect back to and are in service of NMES's primary goal to guarantee secure housing and a "dignified life" for landless women and landless families in general, a master frame that unites other groups as well, and most of these goals are positively framed.
NMES echoed Gandhis tactic of condemning an act or policy without condemning people or institutions in response to a very violent, forced eviction carried out by government forces. In May of 2012, the informal Thapathali settlement on the banks of the Bagmati River was awoken by police with truncheons and bulldozers. Within hours, nearly three hundred homes were bulldozed.37 Activists led protests and chants calling to end the forced evictions and succeeded in garnering significant public support. Of note is their call to end the forced evictions which conspicuously lacked outright condemnations of the police. The ending of forced evictions fits nicely within their larger, positively framed goal of ensuring access for all to secure shelter. A home is hardly secure when police take to bulldozing it. The fact that NMES has grown as substantially as it has it started out as fewer than 10 women and grew to encompass most of the informal settlements in the Kathmandu area is a testament to the organizing potential
36 Ibid.
37 Manandhar, Shilu, Evicted Once, Nepali Settlers Living in the Ruins of a Razed River Settlement Fear
a Recurring Nightmare, Global Press Journal, Nov 5, 2014, http://www.globalpressjournal.com/ asia/nepal/evicted-once-nepali-squatters-living-ruins-razed, retrieved 4/29/15


23
of their positive frames. The frames are also important in regards to policy. Had they limited themselves to negative frames condemning government harassment, issues of quality housing, education, and sanitation would still go unaddressed. As is, their current frames support much more ambitious efforts to affect the national agenda.
This avoidance of negative, adversarial frames is a lesson some #BlackLives-Matter activists would be well served to learn. Recent protests in Denver involved protestors who offered strong, anti-police frames, including a sign that allegedly read the only good cop is a dead cop.38 This is an explicit, negative, adversarial frame which in this case targets a group that is much, much more powerful than the protestors: the police. It similarly alienates large swaths of the population who are much more sympathetic to police than protestors. This is particularly unfortunate in that #BlackLivesMatter itself and calls for justice for Freddie Gray are positive frames with considerable resonance. #BlackLivesMatter serves as a potent master frame uniting various SMOs around the issue of police violence against blacks without specifically casting police as an adversary. It could also be used to address other issues of racial inequality later down the road. Justice for Freddie Gray (or Michael Brown, Tamir Rice, Eric Garner, etc. etc.) is an incident or individual specific frame that positively invokes notions of justice again without overtly making an enemy out of anyone. The mere mention of justice adds resonance. Those who attack the movement when it uses frames of justice must first contend with implicitly being in opposition to an ideal that is widely valued.
38 Roberts, Michael, Denver Police Protests: Eleven Arrests, Pepper Spray, Dead Cop Sign,
Westword, April 30, 2015, http://www.westword.com/news/denver-police-protests-eleven-arrests-pepper-spray-dead-cop-sign-6672516, retrieved 4/30/15


24
Here, Ive argued specific instances where framing effects could have an effect on SMO success, but Im also arguing that the inherent nature of positive and negative frames is such that the adoption of one over the other should produce consistent results. Organizers should be able to reliably adopt or avoid one type of frame and in so doing increase their chance of success. At the minimum, if positive frames were shown through further research to support better policy outcomes, organizers would at least need to know that the adoption of positive frames doesnt hinder chances of success. If the difficulties associated with positive frames significantly undermined SMO success, SMOs might be better served by adopting negative frames for organizing purposes before policy makers then transform frames within the policy process or otherwise work to avoid the policy pitfalls I predict will be present with negative frames. Along those lines,
I will test to see if the adoption of positive or negatively framed goals impacts SMO success.
Testing Framing Effects on Movement Success: Gamsons Dataset
William Gamsons The Strategy of Social Protest attempted to identify certain factors, namely adopted strategies and organizational characteristics, which influenced SMO successes.39 Whereas other scholars prefer to focus on external factors such as political opportunities or existing structures and institutions within a society to predict SMO success, Gamson focused on the internal factors of an SMO because thats what SMOs can actually control. Gamson compiled a list of 53 SMOs ranging from labor unions, third parties, industry cooperatives and trade groups, and other types of SMOs
39
Gamson, William, The Strategy of Social Protest (Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press, 1975)


25
from across the political spectrum. He then coded all 53 groups on 39 different variables including two different measures of success.
Though its far from ideal, Gamsons dataset offers a manageable way to run some simple tests on the effects of positive and negative goal framing on movement success. Importantly, the quality of his work is such that I knew I could trust his data; he is as reputable as they come. I started by going through the 53 organizations and coding their goals as positive, negative, or mixed. In many cases, Gamson included descriptions of SMO goals that were sufficient for coding, but for a number of SMOs, I researched more specific descriptions of their goals to arrive at a code. Coding itself was fairly straightforward, though some organizations featured platforms expressing multiple goals framed positively and negatively, earning them a mixed code. I ended up with 40 organizations coded. The remaining organizations proved difficult to research, with much of them being labor unions. As the 40 coded SMOs already included 10 labor unions, laboring to add more unions to the mix would only serve to skew an already imperfect sample. All of the unions featured positively expressed goals; for example, many were campaigning for the creation of an 8 hour workday among other things. Furthermore, unions were ascendant for the time period in question. Adding several more successful organizations, most of whom were contemporaries operating under shared master frames, seemed ill advised.
Gamsons data offers two measures for success. One measure, the combined outcome measure, relates to an SMOs acceptance by the target as a legitimate organization representing a constituency combined with gaining new benefits for the group. Gamson coded for four possibilities: full response, co-optation, preemption, and col-


26
lapse. Co-optation meant the SMO was accepted as representative but no new benefits for the group were actually secured. Preemption occurs when new benefits are gained, but the SMO isnt accepted by the target. The other measure for success, overall new advantages, also had four levels: no new advantages, equivocal advantages, new advantages, and partial and peripheral advantages.
The hypotheses being tested are as follows:
Ho: There will be no difference in rates of success between SMOs with posi-
tively framed goals and SMOs with negatively framed or mixed goals.
Ha: SMOs with positively framed goals will be successful more frequently than
SMOs with negatively framed or mixed goals.
Though Ive discussed some organizing benefits to both negatively and positively framed goals, as you can see Im assuming that avoiding adversarial frames in relation to more powerful opponents will make positively framed goals more conducive to success.
Though Gamsons dataset offers multiple variables which I can use as controls if desired, given the size of the sample I opted to start with a straight comparison. Because Im working with categorical variables, I performed a crosstabular analysis using the Chi-square and lambda test for significance. My initial test for the first measure of
success, the combined outcome measure, is as follows:


27
Goal Frame* Com Sue Measure Crosstabulation
Count
Com_Suc_Measure Total
Full Response Co- Optation Preemption Collapse
Positive Frame 9 34.6% 3-11.5% 4-15.38% 10-38.5% 26
Goal_Frame Negative Frame 2-22.2% 0 0% 1 -11.1% 6 66.6% 9
Mixed Frames 2 40% 1 20% 0 0% 2 40% 5
Total 13-32.5% 4-10% 5-12.5% 18-45% 40
Chi-Square Tests
Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 3.902a 6 .690
Likelihood Ratio 5.221 6 .516
Linear-by-Linear .080 1 .777
Association
N of Valid Cases 40
a. 10 cells (83.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .50.


28
Directional Measures
Nominal by Nominal
Val ue Asy mp. Std. Erro ra Approx. Tb Approx. Sig.
.056 .000 1.000
Symmetric
000
Goal Frame .000 c C
Lambda
Dependent 000
Com_Suc_Measure .091 .000 1.000
Dependent 000
Goal_Frame .042 .715d
Goodman and Kruskal Dependent 048
*au Com_Suc_Measure .037 ,666d
Dependent 035
a. Not assuming the null hypothesis.
b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.
c. Cannot be computed because the asymptotic standard error equals zero.
d. Based on chi-square approximation
All of the chi-square tests as well as the directional lambda test show a statistical signif-
icance greater than .5 meaning that we can expect to see these same results by chance
over half the time, proving the null hypothesis. I ran the same test with the other mea-
sure of success, overall new advantages:


29
Goal_Frame* New_Advantages Crosstabulation
Count
New_Advantages Total
None Equivocal New Advantages Partial & Peripheral
Positive Frame 9 34.6% 3-11.5% 13-50% 1 3.8% 26
Goal_Frame Negative Frame 5 55% 0 0% 3-33.3% 1 -11.1% 9
Mixed Frames 2 40% 0 0% 2 40% 1 20% 5
Total 16-40% 3 7.5% 18-45% 3 7.5% 40
Chi-Square Tests
Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 4.454a 6 .616
Likelihood Ratio 5.147 6 .525
Linear-by-Linear .002 1 .967
Association
N of Valid Cases 40
a. 10 cells (83.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .38.


30
Directional Measures
Valu e Asymp. Std. Error3 Approx Tb Appr ox. Sig.
Symmetric .056 .093 .580 .562
Goal_Frame .000 .000 C C
Lambda Dependent
Nominal by New_Advantages .091 .150 .580 .562
Nominal Dependent
Goal_Frame .070 .052 ,484d
Goodman and Kruskal Dependent
tau New_Advantages .029 .037 ,750d
Dependent
a. Not assuming the null hypothesis.
b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.
c. Cannot be computed because the asymptotic standard error equals zero.
d. Based on chi-square approximation
Again, all of the chi-square tests as well as the directional lambda test show a statistical significance greater than .5, meaning that we can expect to see these same results by chance over half the time, proving the null hypothesis. In neither case is there a statistically significant relationship between goal framing and SMO success. Given the size of the sample and the results of this test, adding controls would not significantly change the results. No further quantitative analysis of this data for this relationship is warranted.
Analysis and Further Research:
While it is clear that tests on Gamsons dataset did not show any significant relationship, it would be premature to reject the possibility of discovering this relationship through further testing. Simply put, the size and makeup of his dataset, which was fur-


31
ther limited by my coding of goals, was not likely to yield anything conclusive. Had tests on Gamsons dataset revealed a significant relationship, I would similarly suggest that further research with substantially better data sources would be warranted. All that being said, the tests do not indicate that positively framed goals are detrimental to movement success, an important distinction to make.
Further research regarding positive and negative goal framing should address two different factors. Ultimately, my assertion is that positively framed goals will yield better policy outcomes with fewer unintended consequences. Comparing the policy outcomes of positive and negatively framed goals in and of itself could be difficult. Perhaps examining policies that were designed and implemented within the same organization might control for some of the noise that is inherent in the policy process. Even this would be difficult in that some negatively framed individual policies are connected to larger, positively framed initiatives, which I argue changes their character from that of negative master frames.
Researching frame effects in social movements might prove easier, with Cress and Snows 2000 study of homelessness campaigns offering one approach to further study. Having worked professionally in the labor movement, I considered the possibilities of making comparisons between union organizing campaigns conducted by the same union. Union campaign messaging, particularly the master frames, could be coded as positive and negative. Researchers could then control for the type of campaign -i.e. organizing new workers, internal organizing, contract campaigns, etc. etc. the industry being organized, and other factors such as funding or staffing levels to see if there is a correlation between positively framed goals and campaign success. While


32
union frames often are limited to the campaign they were intended for, and campaigns arent always intended to affect the policies of external targets making them a poor fit for suggestions that frames do persist into various policy processes, unions have very specific organizing methodologies executed by trained, experienced organizers. Because of this, examining union organizing would automatically control for a number of factors. The testing of goal framing on movement success is intended to see if positive frames contribute to or at the minimum dont detract from movement success, so that frames that are assumed to be beneficial in the policy process can be adopted without fear of them undermining short-term movement success. To that end, unions offer a suitable test bed.
Conclusion
Despite the failure to detect a statistically significant relationship between goal frames and movement outcomes, the possibility of predictable success through properly structured frames warrants further exploration. Organizers would rest easy knowing that properly crafted frames, while not guarantors of success, would at least limit the possibility of failure, particularly far-off policy failures which are hard to predict and undo. Similarly, policy makers who stick to positively defined goals could rest easy knowing that negative, unintended consequences would be somewhat mitigated by the positive frame. For those who lament the effects of frames on the populace at large, if positive frames proved superior, voters could learn to look askance at politicians who adopt negative frames for political expediency. Frames would cease being a tool of sophists and would instead be tools for the populace to separate the wheat from the
chaff.


33
WORKS CITED
Amenta, Edwin and Caren, Neal, The Legislative, Organizational, and Beneficiary Consequences of State-Oriented Challengers, The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements, ed. by Snow, David, Soule, Sarah, and Kriesi, Hanspeter (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004) pp 461-488
Benford, Robert A. and Snow, David A., Framing Processes and Social Movements: An Overview and Assessment. Annual Review of Sociology 26 (2000) pp 611-639
Birkland, Thomas, Agenda Setting in Public Policy, Handbook of Public Policy
Analysis, ed. by Fischer, Frank, Miller, Gerald, and Sidney, Sara (Boca Raton,
FL: CRC Press, 2007)
Bosso, Christopher J, The Contextual Bases of Problem Definition, The Politics of Problem Definition, ed. by Rochefort, David and Cobb, Roger (Lawrence, KS: Univ. Press of KS, 1994) pp 182-203
Carrol, WK and Ratner, RS, Master Frames and Counter-Hegemony: Political
Sensibilities in Contemporary Social Movements, Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 33, 1996. pp 407-435
Chong, Dennis and Druckman, James N, Framing Theory, Annual Review of Political Science 10 (2007) pp 103-26
Gamson, William, The Strategy of Social Protest (Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press, 1975)
Gandhi, Mohandas K., Hind Swaraj or Indian Home Rule, first published in Indian
Opinion, December 11 and 18, 1909, translated by Mahadev Desai (Lexington, KY: pothi.com, 2013)
Gerhards, Jurgen and Rucht, Dieter, Mesomobilization: Organizing and Framing in Two Protest Campaigns in West Germany, American Journal of Sociology 98:3 (Nov 1992) pp 555-596
Kang, Minah and Jang, Jiho, NIMBY or NIABY? Who Defines a Policy Problem and Why: Analysis of Framing in Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility Placement in South Korea. Asia Pacific Viewpoint 54:1 (April 2013) pp 49-60
Manandhar, Shilu, Evicted Once, Nepali Settlers Living in the Ruins of a Razed River Settlement Fear a Recurring Nightmare, Global Press Journal, Nov 5, 2014, http://www.alobalpressjournal.com/asia/nepal/evicted-once-nepali-squatters-living-ruins-razed, retrieved 4/29/15
Marullo, Sam, Pagnucco, Ron, and Smith, Jackie, Frame Changes and Social Movement Contraction: US Peace Movement Framing After the Cold War, Sociological Inquiry 66:1 (February 1996) pp 1-28


34
Nepal Mahila Ekata Samaj, "About Us," http://mahilaekata.org/about-us/. retrieved 4/25/15
Roberts, Michael, Denver Police Protests: Eleven Arrests, Pepper Spray, Dead Cop Sign, Westword, April 30, 2015, http://www.westword.com/news/denver-police-protests-eleven-arrests-pepper-spray-dead-cop-sign-6672516, retrieved 4/30/15
Rochefort, David and Cobb, Roger, Problem Definition: An Emerging Perspective, The Politics of Problem Definition, ed. by Rochefort, David and Cobb, Roger (Lawrence, KS: Univ. Press of KS, 1994) pp 1-31
Rochon, Thomas and Mazmanian, Daniel, Social Movements and the Policy Process, Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Science 528 (July 1993) pp75-87
Sharp, Elaine, National Antidrug Policymaking, The Politics of Problem Definition, ed. by Rochefort, David and Cobb, Roger (Lawrence, KS: Univ. Press of KS, 1994) pp 98-116
Sharp, Gene, Gandhi as a Political Strategist with Essays on Ethics and Politics (Boston: Porter Sargent Publishers, 1979)
Silver, Ira, Constructing Social ChangeThrough Philanthropy: Boundary Framing and the Articulation of Vocabularies of Motives for Social Movement Participation, Sociological Inquiry 67 (1997) pp 488-503
Sinha, Manisha and Gasper, Des, How Can Power Discourses be Changed?
Contrasting the Daughter Deficit Policy of the Delhi Government with Gandhi and Kings Transformational Reframing, Critical Policy Studies 3:3-4 (Oct Dec 2009) pp 290-308
Snow, David, Framing Processes, Ideology, and Discursive Fields, The Blackwell
Companion to Social Movements, ed. by Snow, David, Soule, Sarah, and Kriesi, Hanspeter (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004) pp 380-412
Snow, David and Benford, Robert, Master Frames and Cycles of Protest. Frontiers in Social Movement Theory ed. by Mueller, Carol McClung and Morris, Aldon D. (New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press, 1992) pp 133-155
Snow, David, Rochford Jr., E. Burke, Worden, Steven, and Benford, Robert, Frame
Alignment Processes, Micromobilization, and Movement Participation, American Sociological Review 51:4 (August 1986) pp 464-481
Swart, William J., The League of Nations and the Irish Question: Master Frames, Cycles of Protest, and Master Frame Alignment, The Sociological Quarterly 36:3 (Summer 1995) pp 465-481
Weber, Thomas, Gandhi, Deep Ecology, Peace Research and Buddhist Economics, Journal of Peace Research 36:3 (May 1999) pp 349-361


35
Zuo, Ziping and Benford, Robert, Mobilization Processes and the 1989 Chinese Democracy Movement, The Sociological Quarterly 36:1 (January 1995) pp 131-156


Full Text

PAGE 1

The Effects of Positively Framed Goals on Movement Outcomes and Public Policies: Consistency and Continuity Through Frame Structure by Peter Gibbins An undergraduate thesis submitted in partial completion of the M etropolitan State University of D enver Honors Program May 2015 Dr. Sheila Rucki Dr. Andrew Thangasamy Dr. Megan Hughes Zarzo Primary Advisor Second Reader Honors Program Director

PAGE 2

The Effects of Positively Framed Goals on Movement Outcomes and Public Policies: Consistency and Continuity Through Frame Structure by Peter Gibbins Abstract: Framing and social movement theorists have long been able to describe frame types and explain framing effects on a case-by-case basis. Policy scholars have similarly studied problem denition theory and its implications for public policies. However, there are very limited discussions as to how certain frame types may contribute to successful outcomes more than others. The author suggests issues can be framed positively and negatively, and that positive frames are more conducive to successful movements or public policies. A limited test of William Gamson's The Strategy of Social Protest dataset fails to reveal a statistically signicant relationship between positive goal frames and movement outcomes.

PAGE 3

! 1 Introduction: The visibility of social movements has increased considerably in recent years. On the Left alone, we've seen the Occupy Wall Street movement dramatically enter and exit the scene, while other movements have ascended to various degrees including movements dealing with homeless rights, environmental concerns, LGBTQ rights, gov ernment surveillance, and perhaps most dramatically, the #BlackLivesMatter movement which has recently captured the nation's attention. An uptick in social movement orga nization (SMO) activity is juxtaposed with, and largely a response to, an unprecedented level of political dysfunction in Washington, DC which borders on paralysis in some of our political institutions, particularly Congress. No longer willing to rely on political insti tutions as a means to have their voices heard, a growing number of Americans are turn ing to SMO's as an alternative way to inuence policy. To the extent more Americans are engaging in social movement activism, the ways in which SMO's inuence public policy needs to be examined. While this is hardly a new topic, I will propose an added way of considering the frames or problem deni tions SMO's adopt. I will also argue that the frames that are adopted to mobilize indi viduals, inuence public opinion, change the agenda, and spur public ofcials into action have the potential of signicantly affecting policy outcomes years down the road not just by bringing about change, but by limiting the change that is possible within the bound aries established by adopted frames. In short, adopting a particular frame for short term gains may have unintended long term consequences. Finally, I will conduct a simple test to see if particular types of frames are more conducive for social movement suc cess.

PAGE 4

! 2 Framing Theory, Problem Denition, and Policy Outcomes Frames are ways in which we organize our thoughts and ideas about the world around us. In communication, frames allow us to speak to the deep-seated beliefs, val ues, and perceptions in our audience by highlighting select aspects of an issue. Sociol ogist David Snow, one of the foremost social movement and framing scholars, de scribes frames thusly: Collective action frames, like picture frames, focus attention by punctuating or specifying what in our sensual eld is relevant and what is irrelevant, what is "in frame" and what is "out of frame," in relation to the object of orientation. 1 By using frames to highlight or obscure particular facets of an issue, we can impact the way individuals perceive an issue and how they feel about it which, in the realm of poli tics and policy, ultimately affects their policy preferences. For example, if a small com munity were confronted by a hate group that wanted to lead a march down Main Street, the way in which the question of whether or not to allow the march is framed for citizens might impact their policy preferences. If people presented this situation as relating to or impacting free speech rights, people might support allowing the march to continue even though they might nd the views of the hate group repugnant. Conversely, if the situa tion were presented as posing a potential threat to public safety because the hate group uses violent rhetoric, those same people might oppose the march despite their belief in free speech. Snow, David, "Framing Processes, Ideology, and Discursive Fields," The Blackwell Companion to Social 1 Movements, ed. by Snow, David, Soule, Sarah, and Kriesi, Hanspeter (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004) pp 380-412, p 384

PAGE 5

! 3 Frames are usually considered to have three components, often analyzed as in dividual frames in and of themselves: diagnosis, prognosis, and resonance. Diagnostic 2 framing consists of dening the problem at hand. It often, though not always, involves assigning blame or responsibility to a particular person, group, or institution, and diag nostic frames consistently invoke a shared value. Many scholars refer to the use of "in justice frames" in diagnostic framing which, as one would expect, highlight the injustice of a given problem as it relates to a particular group in society; injustice frames attempt to appeal to commonly held notions of what is and is not just. A very recent example 3 would be the #BlackLivesMatter movement's protests in Baltimore which called for "Jus tice for Freddie Gray." "Adversarial" and "boundary" framing in diagnostic frames attempt to delineate between a target constituency and some different, external "other." These frames cast 4 actors as protagonists and antagonists and can present a problem as being a battle of "good" versus "evil." At its worst, this type of frame can be utilized to drum up hatred against a weak group in society; Hitler's vilication of the Jews and other political and ethnic groups which then led to the Holocaust comes to mind. Returning to #Black LivesMatter, some activists have invoked frames casting police as the enemy, a use of Marullo, Sam, Pagnucco, Ron, and Smith, Jackie, "Frame Changes and Social Movement Contraction: 2 US Peace Movement Framing After the Cold War," Sociological Inquiry 66:1 (February 1996) pp 1-28, p 2 Carrol, WK and Ratner, RS, "Master Frames and Counter-Hegemony: Political Sensibilities in 3 Contemporary Social Movements," Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 33, 1996. pp 407-435 Silver, Ira, "Constructing Social Change' Through Philanthropy: Boundary Framing and the Articulation 4 of Vocabularies of Motives for Social Movement Participation," Sociological Inquiry 67 (1997) pp 488-503

PAGE 6

! 4 the adversarial frame which is fundamentally and functionally different from the afore mentioned injustice frames used in the same movement. Prognosis framing or prognostic frames further the denition of the problem in cluding the assignment of responsibility, but they then suggest solutions to the problem. In their case study of a debate regarding the placement of a radioactive waste facility in South Korea, Minah Kang and Jiho Jang describe an interesting use of prognosis fram ing by the Korean government. With environmentalists casting the placement of a 5 waste facility as environmentally hazardous, the government used prognostic framing as a counter-frame to co-opt and undermine the environmentalists' position. The gov ernment reframed the problem as not having to do with the placement of a new facility, but as pertaining to the condition of existing facilities. Existing facilities were approach ing their capacity which was framed as being environmentally hazardous. This allowed the construction of the new facility to be framed as being environmentally responsible as it would solve the problem of existing facilities becoming dangerously full. Resonance refers to the extent to which the frame gains traction and effectively mobilizes people or inuences public opinion in the manner intended. Resonance is 6 closely intertwined with the perception of an SMO's tactics. As Benford and Snow ex plain, an SMO's actions must be consistent with the frame being put forth: inconsistency can manifest itself in two ways: in terms of apparent contradictions among beliefs or claims; and in terms of perceived contradictions Kang, Minah and Jang, Jiho, "NIMBY or NIABY? Who Denes a Policy Problem and Why: Analysis of 5 Framing in Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility Placement in South Korea." Asia Pacic Viewpoint 54:1 (April 2013) pp 49-60, p 54 Benford, Robert A. and Snow, David A., "Framing Processes and Social Movements: An Overview and 6 Assessment." Annual Review of Sociology 26 (2000) pp 611-639, pp 619-620.

PAGE 7

! 5 among framings and tactical actions (as between what an SMO says and what it does). 7 For example, an SMO that uses nonviolent frames will see its frames' resonance dimin ished if it then engages in violence actions. The greater the inconsistencies between frame and actions, the less resonance a frame has. A key aspect of resonance includes the way in which a frame invokes deeply held cultural values. Zuo and Benford analyzed the cultural resonance of frames in their case study of China's pro-democracy protests in 1989. Student activists knew that 8 their protests would be cast as anti-revolutionary and traitorous by the inevitable counter-framing from the communist government. The students deliberately made ap peals to long-held Chinese values of nationalism and Confucianism in their frames while also invoking communist ideals. The extreme resonance of their frames allowed their message to spread far and wide despite the student's limited access to networks of communication, i.e. media outlets or existing SMOs. And, as hoped, the government's counter-framing failed because the government crackdown was so blatantly inconsistent with the traditional values that the students put forth. The government's invocation of those same values was completely ineffective in the face of their own gross inconsis tencies. Master frames are larger frames that are shared by or encompass many different SMOs, though their denition has been the subject of debate. Benford and Snow's de velopment of this concept is as follows: Ibid., p 620 7 Zuo, Ziping and Benford, Robert, "Mobilization Processes and the 1989 Chinese Democracy 8 Movement," The Sociological Quarterly 36:1 (January 1995) pp 131-156

PAGE 8

! 6 [Master frames] perform the same function as movement specic collective action frames, but they do so on a larger scale. In other words, they are also modes of punctuation, attribution, and articulation, but their punctuations, attributions, and articulations may color and constrain those of any number of movement organizations. 9 "Civil Rights" or "equal rights" were part of the master frame dening the civil rights movement which encompassed a large number of SMOs. Emerging SMOs adopting this master frame would have their positions be both characterized and limited by that overarching frame. However, some take issue with this conception of master frames in that it describes what they are overarching frames that unite clusters of related SMOs but it fails to account for how they come to be. William Swart offers this answer, using the "civil rights" master frame as an example: "civil rights" was a master frame during the 1960's, not because it was utilized by a diversity of social movements but because of its cultural resonance with the postwar optimism over the successful defense of freedom, equality, and democracy. The rhetoric of rightsprovided powerful symbolic tenets that a diversity of movements could use in dening and expressing grievances and goalsmovement actors utilize the master frames generated by prior movements because they represent successful and culturally potent ideational themes. 10 In other words, particularly resonant frames which persist and prove successful are adopted by growing numbers of SMOs to become master frames. Ultimately, a principal use of frames by SMOs is to mobilize a target constituency into action. To do so, SMOs must somehow connect their frame to the existing griev ances or desires of an as-of-yet unorganized population. The process of connecting an Snow, David and Benford, Robert, "Master Frames and Cycles of Protest." Frontiers in Social 9 Movement Theory ed. by Mueller, Carol McClung and Morris, Aldon D. (New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press, 1992) pp 133-155, p 138 Swart, William J., "The League of Nations and the Irish Question: Master Frames, Cycles of Protest, 10 and Master Frame Alignment,'" The Sociological Quarterly 36:3 (Summer 1995) pp 465-481, p 469

PAGE 9

! 7 individual's existing ideas, which are likely not conceptualized as frames at rst, to a frame being utilized by an SMO, is called "frame bridging." In addition to frame bridg 11 ing, SMOs also engage in "frame amplication" to increase mobilization and a frame's resonance. Amplication is generally classied as "value amplication" or "belief ampli cation." In an American context, values might include ideals of equality or the Jeffer sonian triad of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," whereas beliefs might include a commonly held belief in the free market's ability to fuel innovation and generate wealth. Also, beliefs may address "the seriousness of the problem, issue, or grievance in question" or "the locus of causality or blame." 12 While much of the literature on framing theory is produced by sociologists, politi cal scientists and policy scholars have also acknowledged the obvious importance lan guage has in shaping debates and, in turn, policy outcomes. Writing on the topic of problem denition, policy scholars David Rochefort and Roger Cobb describe the role of language in problem denition: The uses of language are crucial to the political analysis of public policy-making and problem denition. Language is essential to understanding, argument, and individual and group expression, which all gure into the denition of social problems for public attention. Language can be the vehicle for employing symbols that lend legitimacy to one denition and undermine the legitimacy of another 13 Snow, David, Rochford Jr., E. Burke, Worden, Steven, and Benford, Robert, "Frame Alignment 11 Processes, Micromobilization, and Movement Participation," American Sociological Review 51:4 (August 1986) pp 464-481, p 467 Ibid., p 470 12 Rochefort, David and Cobb, Roger, "Problem Denition: An Emerging Perspective," The Politics of 13 Problem Denition, ed. by Rochefort, David and Cobb, Roger (Lawrence, KS: Univ. Press of KS, 1994) pp 1-31, p 9

PAGE 10

! 8 Whereas David Snow's denition of framing speaks to the way frames highlight particu lar aspects of an issue by drawing our attention to them and away from another aspect, Rochefort and Cobb's approach in problem denition speaks to the power of words to buttress or undermine particular problem denitions. The importance of this from a poli cy standpoint cannot be overstated. The problem of drug abuse is an issue which has captured the public's attention off and on for decades; it's rare for an issue to be central in policy discussions for as long as drug abuse has. This is due in part to what problem denition scholars refer to as "drama" and "proximity." Proximity refers to the closeness of the issue to individu 14 als in a society. In the case of drug abuse, while most people are not drug addicts, many people are affected by addiction through friends and family members. Drama is just what it sounds like; in the case of drug abuse, violent crimes related to drug trafck ing and acute public health issues heighten the drama and immediacy of the issue. The problem of drug abuse has been dened (or framed) as a crime issue and a public health issue, with different presidential administrations favoring one frame over the oth er, though dening drug abuse as a criminal issue has been dominant in recent decades. This shift in frame has profound implications for proffered solutions. A crimi nal frame results in increased law enforcement funding, stricter sentencing laws, and now, after decades of the "War on Drugs," mass incarceration. A public health frame often results in substantially different solutions including treatment programs, needle exchanges, methadone clinics, and the like. Two different denitions of the same prob Sharp, Elaine, "National Antidrug Policymaking," The Politics of Problem Denition, ed. by Rochefort, 14 David and Cobb, Roger (Lawrence, KS: Univ. Press of KS, 1994) pp 98-116

PAGE 11

! 9 lem yield fundamentally different results. Framing scholars Benford and Snow would explain this as "the identication of specic problems and causesconstrain[ing] the range of possible reasonable' solutions and strategies advocated." Reframe or 15 change your problem denition and a different set of "reasonable" solutions emerge. The similarities of framing and problem denition aside, framing scholars tend to look at framing in social movements or, more generally, the public arena. They are less likely to examine framing as it plays out in the halls of government. This is not to say that framing and social movement scholars do not consider how SMOs affect policy, but the effects of frames on policy outcomes are eclipsed by work looking more at relatively short term SMO success. In The Strategies of Social Protest sociologist William Gam son examines which SMO strategies are most likely to lead to success, with success being dened as a group gaining acceptance, that is, access to the policy process, or through the gaining of new advantages secured by policy changes. Gamson's later 16 works similarly focuses on movement tactics with frames featured as a tool for mobiliza tion. Amenta and Caren offer a similar take on SMO success related to public policy. They present a three level approach regarding access to benets and collective goods. The best outcome is when a group gains continuing leverage over the policy process, a concept that is similar to Gamson's notion of acceptance. This outcome is important in that long term leverage translates to long term access to benets and public goods. The next best outcome is a group gaining access to benets which will persist until and Benford, Robert A. and Snow, David A., "Framing Processes and Social Movements: An Overview and 15 Assessment." p 616 Gamson, William, The Strategy of Social Protest (Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press, 1975) 16

PAGE 12

! 10 unless countering action is taken. At the minimum, a group may enjoy limited benets resulting from a single law or decision. Again, in this study, to the extent frames are 17 considered, they are considered as mobilizing tools to be strategically employed, not as variable affecting policy outcomes. Thomas Rochon and David Mazmanian build on Gamson's work by suggesting a third type of movement success: changing values. The changing of values should not 18 be overlooked as it is, according to Rochon and Mazmanian, central to agenda setting. Agenda setting is one of the most important ways SMOs can impact the policy process, and it's particularly important in terms of frames or problem denitions. Thomas Birk land identies agenda setting as "the process by which problems and alternative solu tions gain or lose public and elite attention." Birkland further denes an agenda as fol 19 lows: An agenda is a collection of problems, understandings of causes, symbols, solutions, and other elements of public problems that come to the attention of members of the public and their government ofcials. 20 Agenda setting is important in that it is the part of the process where SMO frames can be adopted as problem denitions. It is the point where frames become variables af fecting policies themselves. Amenta, Edwin and Caren, Neal, "The Legislative, Organizational, and Beneciary Consequences of 17 State-Oriented Challengers," The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements, ed. by Snow, David, Soule, Sarah, and Kriesi, Hanspeter (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004) pp 461-488, p 465 Rochon, Thomas and Mazmanian, Daniel, "Social Movements and the Policy Process," Annals of 18 American Academy of Political and Social Science 528 (July 1993) pp75-87, p 77 Birkland, Thomas, "Agenda Setting in Public Policy," Handbook of Public Policy Analysis ed. by 19 Fischer, Frank, Miller, Gerald, and Sidney, Sara (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2007) p 63 Ibid. 20

PAGE 13

! 11 With this string of concepts, we can begin to see how the frames initially crafted by an SMO for the purpose of mobilizing a population can persist over time to become the problem denitions around which policy is made. As such, we can construct a sim ple model of SMO driven policy change: 1.An SMO begins to form around a particular issue. SMO members begin to construct frames for the purpose of organizing and mobilizing a target constituency into action. 2.An SMO engages in frame bridging to mobilize the constituency. 3.The SMO grows and the developing frame increases in resonance. 4.The SMO's resonant frame gains the attention of other SMOs working on similar issues. The original frame becomes a master frame for multiple SMOs. 5.A large social movement operating under a shared master frame utilizes strategies consistent with the master frame to effectively inuence policy makers; one or many of the SMOs either gain acceptance and access to the policy process and/or change the agenda to reect the policy preferences of the SMOs' constituencies. 6.The SMOs' master frame is added to the policy agenda and modied as a problem denition. Policy makers design and implement solutions constrained by the denition provided. 7.Constituents now enjoy the results of new policies crafted around the frames originally used to mobilize them, and new desires and grievances are formed around which new SMOs will rise. I would argue from my own professional experience that movement organizers rarely consider the implications of the frames they adopt beyond step 5, and most orga

PAGE 14

! 12 nizers don't even expect that their particular SMO will make it to step 3 or 4. It's certain ly understandable, given the many challenges that SMOs face, that many people are unable to consider the long term implications of adopted frames. However, if organizers knew that certain types of frames would help or at least not hurt their chances at short term success while simultaneously allowing for better outcomes over the long term, I suspect they would be more than happy to adjust their framing practices accordingly. Positive and Negative Goals Much of framing and denition literature focuses on how specic frames were employed in specic situations, yet there is little to suggest that particular types of frames can or should be consistently employed to achieve consistent results. That be ing said, some movement leaders have insisted on the use of particular types of frames, though they didn't necessarily describe them as such. Writing in his seminal pamphlet Hind Swaraj, published in the pages of his newspaper, Indian Opinion in 1909, Mo handas Gandhi would insist that the goals of the Indian independence movement need ed to be framed in a particular fashion. Specic to independence, it was not enough for Indians to rid India of the British. Simply driving the British from India could easily lead to a new, Indian-led tyranny. He believed that Indians needed to set out to create a new, just India. Decolonization could be viewed as a necessary step towards a just In dia, but it was hardly the end goal. 21 Gandhi's broader goal of creating a more just India included very specic articu lations of what a just India would look like. It was not, notably, the parliamentary system Gandhi, Mohandas K., Hind Swaraj or Indian Home Rule rst published in Indian Opinion, December 21 11 and 18, 1909, translated by Mahadev Desai (Lexington, KY: pothi.com, 2013) p 122

PAGE 15

! 13 Indians eventually opted for. (Also in Hind Swaraj Gandhi famously likened the British parliament to a whore.) His goal of a more just India is what I would describe as a 22 positive goal. His goal included the creation of something new, something to be worked for or towards. Conversely, those in the independence movement working to simply dri ve the British out were focused on a negative goal, that is, there was something they were working against, the British colonial system, or there was a condition, being colo nized, that they were trying to end. Again, it's important to note that regarding decolo nization, Gandhi considered it a likely necessary pre-condition for a just India, but he entertained the possibility, perhaps only for the sake of argument, that a just India was possible under British rule. The Indians could describe the type of society they wished to live in. If the British were willing and able to provide a system of governance that al lowed for Indians to live in a just society, why bother with ghting to drive them out? 23 As unlikely as this was, the suggestion was intended to highlight a pitfall to thinking in negative terms. One may end up ghting battles one doesn't need to ght; One may end up tilting at windmills. Perhaps even worse, actions taken in service of a negatively framed goal may have negative, unintended consequences for society. This idea of positively framed goals, though Gandhi himself does not describe them as such, is central to philosophies of nonviolence. Later in Hind Swaraj, Gandhi proposes a connection between the means and the ends upon which nonviolent philosophies hinge: Ibid., p 44 22 Ibid., p 93 23

PAGE 16

! 14 The means may be likened to a seed, the end to a tree; and there is just the same inviolable connection between the means and the end as there is between the seed and the tree. ...We reap exactly as we sow. He goes on to say that "fair means alone can produce fair results" It follows then, 24 that if the means and ends are inseparable, one must have a clear idea of the intended end in order to settle on appropriate means. One must have a clearly articulated posi tive goal. I would add that this concept of an inseparable means and ends dovetails easily with framing theorists observation that a frame's resonance depends on an SMO acting in accordance with the frame it puts forth. Gandhi offers up other reasons for adopting positively framed goals as well. When advocating for his "constructive program," his 17-point plan for the creation of a new just India, Gandhi presents a metaphor for pursuing social change. He proposes that if one's house were in such disrepair that it needed to be replaced entirely, it would be ill-advised to start by tearing down the existing house. This would be akin to pursu ing a negatively framed goal. In eliminating a particular thing, one might be unprepared to deal with the problems the absence of that thing would bring. Instead, he suggests that before tearing down the house, a new house should be planned for and built. If needed, one can build one room at a time and incorporate useful elements from the old house. Eventually, a new, adequate house will stand, and the inadequate house will be no more. 25 Ibid., p 96 24 Sharp, Gene, Gandhi as a Political Strategist with Essays on Ethics and Politics (Boston: Porter 25 Sargent Publishers, 1979) pp 80-81

PAGE 17

! 15 Though this metaphor, like many of Gandhi's rhetorical devices, may come off as overly simple or folksy, it speaks to very real pitfalls he was consciously trying to avoid. In the case of Indian independence, if the British left in response to an independence movement before the Indians had developed some plan of how they would govern themselves after a century of rule by the British Raj, the resulting power vacuum and political instability would prove disastrous. In recent times, the US invaded Iraq to top ple Saddam Hussein, and despite all the rhetoric about nation building and bringing democracy to the Middle East, we focused on the negative goal of removing Saddam. Our attempts to impose a new power structure on the country after the fact proved in adequate and disastrous. We tore down the rst house too soon, if we should've torn it down at all. Similar critiques could be made of the Egyptian Revolution or the US inter vention in Libya. This distinction between positive and negatively framed goals is explored through the work of later Gandhian thinkers. Writing on Gandhi's intellectual inuence on tradi tions outside of civil disobedience, peace studies scholar Thomas Weber explains Jo han Galtung's Gandhian approach to peace studies. In American traditions, peace was often thought of simply as the absence of war, however this conception is inherently negative, and it leaves room for any number of ills to persist in peacetime. Galtung in sisted on the adoption of a positive conception of peace. Such a conception would go on to address indirect forms of violence, i.e. structural violence, which can persist in the absence of war. 26 Weber, Thomas, "Gandhi, Deep Ecology, Peace Research and Buddhist Economics," Journal of Peace 26 Research 36:3 (May 1999) pp 349-361, p 354

PAGE 18

! 16 This positive conception of peace championed by Galtung would make its way into the framing literature. Writing on the contraction of the US peace movement after the Cold War and the perceived success of the rst Gulf War, Marullo, Pagnucco, and Smith observed that peace based SMOs began adopting positively expressed frames around peace in the tradition of Galtung; they identify the positive peace frame as hav ing four components: "promoting social justice, supporting human rights, protecting the environment, and seeking economic rather than military foreign aid." This is in stark 27 contrast to the negative frames employed during the Cold War, namely anti-intervention ist and anti-nuclear frames. Once the Cold War ended, anti-nuclear frames no longer resonated. Anti-interventionist frames lost currency for a number of reasons. Some people felt that the Gulf War was a successful intervention, while naysayers were forced to acknowledge that international institutions weren't up to the task of limiting state be havior to peaceful ends, undermining many of the arguments central to the anti-inter ventionist frame. Beyond that, many people naively assumed that the end of the Cold War would spell the end of foreign interventions in all but the most extreme circum stances. Facing a crisis of relevancy as the conditions they were opposed to ceased to be issues, peace SMOs transformed their frames. Marullo, Pagnucco and Smith's re search showed that in the early 90's among peace SMOs only positive frames in creased in use while the use of negative, that is "anti" frames decreased or stayed the same. 28 Marullo, Sam, Pagnucco, Ron, and Smith, Jackie, "Frame Changes and Social Movement Contraction: 27 US Peace Movement Framing After the Cold War," p 13 Ibid. 28

PAGE 19

! 17 Sinha and Gasper directly address the framing of Gandhi and his American torch-bearer, Martin Luther King, Jr. In describing the framing techniques used by both, they highlight what was done well including the use of frames that I identify as positive, though Sinha and Gasper don't explicitly describe them as such. Both Gandhi and King used value amplication by adopting the values of both their own native groups or cul tures as well as the values of their targets the British and American Whites making counter framing very difcult for potential opponents. While appealing to British and American values, they completely refrained from assigning blame on specic individuals or groups, skillfully avoiding any sort of negative, adversarial frame. During the Salt March, for example, Gandhi condemned the Salt Tax itself as evil but offered no con demnation of the British themselves. They also used frames of equal rights and free dom for all as powerful bridging frames that united various groups. The respective rights frames used by both, said frames being the master frames that persisted throughout their movements, are positive frames dedicated to the creation of new condi tions. The article juxtaposes Gandhi and King's "transformational reframing" with the negative, adversarial frames deployed as part of an unsuccessful, government effort to address female infanticide in Delhi. 29 Policy scholars also recognize the use of negative language in problem deni tion. It would seem that it is a habit of American presidents to use negative, adversarial frames to target drug addicts, the poor, or groups they intend to tax. Chong and 30 Sinha, Manisha and Gasper, Des, "How Can Power Discourses be Changed? Contrasting the Daugh 29 ter Decit' Policy of the Delhi Government with Gandhi and King's Transformational Re framing," Critical Policy Studies 3:3-4 (Oct Dec 2009) pp 290-308 Bosso, Christopher J, "The Contextual Bases of Problem Denition," The Politics of Problem Denition, 30 ed. by Rochefort, David and Cobb, Roger (Lawrence, KS: Univ. Press of KS, 1994) pp 182-203

PAGE 20

! 18 Druckman, who also lament the corrosive effects of frames on public opinion and having an informed electorate, note the use of negative frames in casting particular groups in society in a negative light. It would seem that most mentions of negative frames 31 present frames that are adversarial frames, though the adversary needn't be a person or group. The "war on drugs" is a negative frame where the adversary is a thing: drugs. Though negative and positive frames are clearly mentioned and referred to in the literature, rarely is one considered an alternative to the other, that is, it's rare that a scholar in identifying a negative frame would suggest or identify an alternative positive frame that could have or should have been used. Sinha and Gasper stand out in that regard, thought they don't explicitly use the words "positive" or "negative." I, on the oth er hand, am explicitly suggesting that positive frames are preferable due to specic qualities that are inherent in positive and negative frames independent of their content. From a policy standpoint, I'll refer back to Gandhian conceptions including posi tive notions of peace. Like Galtung's positive peace frame, positively framed goals al low for the larger system to be considered and critiqued in ways negative frames don't allow. Using the War on Drugs as an example, had a positive frame been adopted perhaps a frame emphasizing the public health aspect of the problem through promot ing healthy communities the reasonable solutions that frame allows might include bet ter health services and economic opportunities in the poverty-stricken neighborhoods that were particularly ravaged by crack and heroin epidemics in recent decades. Of equal importance is what the positive frame doesn't allow as a reasonable solution: Chong, Dennis and Druckman, James N, "Framing Theory," Annual Review of Political Science 10 31 (2007) pp 103-26

PAGE 21

! 19 over-policing and mass incarceration. It's incredibly difcult for one to seriously suggest that a prison term for a sick person is the best thing to make him or her healthier In stead, the negative frame was adopted which included viewing drug use as a criminal problem and it used negative, adversarial frames which labeled addicts themselves as criminals. When the problem is about criminals, incarceration becomes a reasonable solution and treatment programs become politically untenable. Furthermore, the nega tive War on Drugs frame fails to even acknowledge the crushing poverty that fuels both drug use and trafcking, the same structural violence negative peace frames similarly ignore. When it comes to SMO success, positive and negative frames have organizing implications which are also inherent to their structure. Gerhards and Rucht hypothesize that the "larger the range of problems covered by a frame, the larger the range of social groups that can be addressed with the frame and the greater the mobilization capacity of the frame." This hypothesis is similar to Sinha and Gasper's observation that King 32 and Gandhi's use of broad, rights frames allowed them to appeal to vast swaths of soci ety without explicitly alienating anyone. Marullo, Pagnucco, and Smith observed that the adoption of positive frames in the peace movement allowed organizations to hold the interest of more devoted mem bers in a time of contraction, though this observation has interesting implications. On one hand, those who were interested in positive frames as a foundation for radical cri tiques of the existing order stuck around keeping agging SMOs alive, but its notable Gerhards, Jurgen and Rucht, Dieter, "Mesomobilization: Organizing and Framing in Two Protest 32 Campaigns in West Germany," American Journal of Sociology 98:3 (Nov 1992) pp 555-596, p 580

PAGE 22

! 20 that SMOs didn't adopt positive frames at the movement's height. One could infer that positive frames perhaps could not be adopted when the movement saw more participa tion and ideological diversity. Perhaps it is easier for a large number of people to agree that something is bad, whereas agreeing on positively framed solutions might prove dif cult. In the case of a peace movement, a lot of people really don't like war. If one shifts to a positive frame with its critiques of structural violence and solutions that may clash with many people's ideologies, participation might drop off. At the same time, many negative frames are adversarial in nature which presents its own pitfalls for SMOs. When politicians adopt negative, adversarial frames, they of ten target a weak, unpopular group in society to curry favor with a more powerful con stituency. In so doing, they can use the negative frame to leverage support for various policy prescriptions. Frankly, presidents can use the bully pulpit to beat up on drug ad dicts all day long and still win elections and policy ghts. SMOs operate under different power dynamics. At least initially, many SMOs, particularly grassroots ones, have little in the way of resources or power. Otherwise, they wouldn't have to resort to grassroots organizing. The adoption of a negative, adversarial frame would likely pit the SMO against a more powerful group. William Gamson identies the extent to which an SMO attempts to destroy or replace its target as a factor governing success. SMOs which target the antagonist as something to be replaced have signicantly lower chances of success, possibly due in part to the more signicant response it draws from the more powerful antagonist. This same conict, though not entirely avoidable, is less likely 33 with the adoption of a positive frame. Groups could also follow Gandhi's use of a larger, Gamson, William, The Strategy of Social Protest (Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press, 1975) p 65 33

PAGE 23

! 21 positive master frame combined with a very targeted, non-adversarial negative frame which is limited to a single issue as he did in condemning the salt tax as unjust without condemning those who enacted the tax. Nepal Mahila Ekata Samaj (NMES) utilizes this very framing tactic to great effect in Kathmandu, Nepal. NMES started when a small number of women living in informal settlements in Kathmandu began saving a few rupees a month that they managed to save from striking harder bargains when shopping for vegetables at local markets. The savings were combined to form a edgling savings and micro-nancing co-op. NMES has since grown into a larger organization that not only boasts a credit cooperative with over $100,000 in assets, but also an inter-community network and organizing program that coordinates public demonstrations, advocates on landless issues to the govern ment and the broader community, offers trainings to landless women, and provides ba sic services. NMES's vision is for a "prosperous society that is economically equitable, cultur ally plural, socially equal and inclusive" is very similar to positive peace frames. The 34 organization's mission is for landless women to live a dignied life with access to secure shelter. In service of the mission, the women of NMES have adopted a set of goals, 35 which are as follows (the following are edited and paraphrased from NMES writings): Organize landless women throughout Nepal. Develop the capacity of landless women to ensure a dignied life in Nepali society. Develop ways to function effectively in the face of forced evictions and for the elimination of domestic violence. Nepal Mahila Ekata Samaj, "About Us," http://mahilaekata.org/about-us/ retrieved 4/25/15 34 Ibid. 35

PAGE 24

! 22 Strengthen existing networks, both within and between squatter communities, to address issues related to women's rights, housing rights, and land rights. Educate landless women about their rights and advocate for landless rights in public policy. Develop proper advocacy programs to make authorities aware of issues impacting landless women. 36 All of these goals connect back to and are in service of NMES's primary goal to guaran tee secure housing and a "dignied life" for landless women and landless families in general, a master frame that unites other groups as well, and most of these goals are positively framed. NMES echoed Gandhi's tactic of condemning an act or policy without condemn ing people or institutions in response to a very violent, forced eviction carried out by government forces. In May of 2012, the informal Thapathali settlement on the banks of the Bagmati River was awoken by police with truncheons and bulldozers. Within hours, nearly three hundred homes were bulldozed. Activists led protests and chants calling 37 to end the forced evictions and succeeded in garnering signicant public support. Of note is their call to end the forced evictions which conspicuously lacked outright con demnations of the police. The ending of forced evictions ts nicely within their larger, positively framed goal of ensuring access for all to "secure shelter." A home is hardly secure when police take to bulldozing it. The fact that NMES has grown as substantially as it has it started out as fewer than 10 women and grew to encompass most of the informal settlements in the Kathmandu area is a testament to the organizing potential Ibid. 36 Manandhar, Shilu, "Evicted Once, Nepali Settlers Living in the Ruins of a Razed River Settlement Fear 37 a Recurring Nightmare," Global Press Journal Nov 5, 2014, http://www.globalpressjournal.com/ asia/nepal/evicted-once-nepali-squatters-living-ruins-razed, retrieved 4/29/15

PAGE 25

! 23 of their positive frames. The frames are also important in regards to policy. Had they limited themselves to negative frames condemning government harassment, issues of quality housing, education, and sanitation would still go unaddressed. As is, their cur rent frames support much more ambitious efforts to affect the national agenda. This avoidance of negative, adversarial frames is a lesson some #BlackLives Matter activists would be well served to learn. Recent protests in Denver involved pro testors who offered strong, anti-police frames, including a sign that allegedly read "the only good cop is a dead cop." This is an explicit, negative, adversarial frame which in 38 this case targets a group that is much, much more powerful than the protestors: the po lice. It similarly alienates large swaths of the population who are much more sympathet ic to police than protestors. This is particularly unfortunate in that #BlackLivesMatter itself and calls for "justice for Freddie Gray" are positive frames with considerable reso nance. #BlackLivesMatter serves as a potent master frame uniting various SMOs around the issue of police violence against blacks without specically casting police as an adversary. It could also be used to address other issues of racial inequality later down the road. "Justice for Freddie Gray" (or Michael Brown, Tamir Rice, Eric Garner, etc. etc.) is an incident or individual specic frame that positively invokes notions of justice again without overtly making an enemy out of anyone. The mere mention of jus tice adds resonance. Those who attack the movement when it uses frames of justice must rst contend with implicitly being in opposition to an ideal that is widely valued. Roberts, Michael, "Denver Police Protests: Eleven Arrests, Pepper Spray, Dead Cop' Sign," 38 Westword, April 30, 2015, http://www.westword.com/news/denver-police-protests-eleven-arrestspepper-spray-dead-cop-sign-6672516, retrieved 4/30/15

PAGE 26

! 24 Here, I've argued specic instances where framing effects could have an effect on SMO success, but I'm also arguing that the inherent nature of positive and negative frames is such that the adoption of one over the other should produce consistent re sults. Organizers should be able to reliably adopt or avoid one type of frame and in so doing increase their chance of success. At the minimum, if positive frames were shown through further research to support better policy outcomes, organizers would at least need to know that the adoption of positive frames doesn't hinder chances of success. If the difculties associated with positive frames signicantly undermined SMO success, SMOs might be better served by adopting negative frames for organizing purposes be fore policy makers then transform frames within the policy process or otherwise work to avoid the policy pitfalls I predict will be present with negative frames. Along those lines, I will test to see if the adoption of positive or negatively framed goals impacts SMO suc cess. Testing Framing Effects on Movement Success: Gamson's Dataset William Gamson's The Strategy of Social Protest attempted to identify certain factors, namely adopted strategies and organizational characteristics, which inuenced SMO successes. Whereas other scholars prefer to focus on external factors such as 39 political opportunities or existing structures and institutions within a society to predict SMO success, Gamson focused on the internal factors of an SMO because that's what SMOs can actually control. Gamson compiled a list of 53 SMOs ranging from labor unions, third parties, industry cooperatives and trade groups, and other types of SMOs Gamson, William, The Strategy of Social Protest (Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press, 1975) 39

PAGE 27

! 25 from across the political spectrum. He then coded all 53 groups on 39 different vari ables including two different measures of success. Though its far from ideal, Gamson's dataset offers a manageable way to run some simple tests on the effects of positive and negative goal framing on movement success. Importantly, the quality of his work is such that I knew I could trust his data; he is as reputable as they come. I started by going through the 53 organizations and cod ing their goals as "positive," "negative," or "mixed." In many cases, Gamson included descriptions of SMO goals that were sufcient for coding, but for a number of SMOs, I researched more specic descriptions of their goals to arrive at a code. Coding itself was fairly straightforward, though some organizations featured platforms expressing multiple goals framed positively and negatively, earning them a "mixed" code. I ended up with 40 organizations coded. The remaining organizations proved difcult to re search, with much of them being labor unions. As the 40 coded SMOs already included 10 labor unions, laboring to add more unions to the mix would only serve to skew an al ready imperfect sample. All of the unions featured positively expressed goals; for ex ample, many were campaigning for the creation of an 8 hour workday among other things. Furthermore, unions were ascendant for the time period in question. Adding several more successful organizations, most of whom were contemporaries operating under shared master frames, seemed ill advised. Gamson's data offers two measures for success. One measure, the "combined outcome measure," relates to an SMO's acceptance by the target as a legitimate orga nization representing a constituency combined with gaining new benets for the group. Gamson coded for four possibilities: full response, co-optation, preemption, and col

PAGE 28

! 26 lapse. Co-optation meant the SMO was accepted as representative but no new benets for the group were actually secured. Preemption occurs when new benets are gained, but the SMO isn't accepted by the target. The other measure for success, overall new advantages, also had four levels: no new advantages, equivocal advantages, new ad vantages, and partial and peripheral advantages. The hypotheses being tested are as follows: H 0 :There will be no difference in rates of success between SMOs with posi tively framed goals and SMOs with negatively framed or mixed goals. H A :SMOs with positively framed goals will be successful more frequently than SMOs with negatively framed or mixed goals. Though I've discussed some organizing benets to both negatively and positively framed goals, as you can see I'm assuming that avoiding adversarial frames in relation to more powerful opponents will make positively framed goals more conducive to suc cess. Though Gamson's dataset offers multiple variables which I can use as controls if desired, given the size of the sample I opted to start with a straight comparison. Be cause I'm working with categorical variables, I performed a crosstabular analysis using the Chi-square and lambda test for signicance. My initial test for the rst measure of success, the combined outcome measure, is as follows:

PAGE 29

! 27 Goal_Frame Com_Suc_Measure Crosstabulation Count Com_Suc_Measure Total Full Response CoOptation Preemption Collapse Goal_Frame Positive Frame 9 34.6% 3 11.5% 4 15.38% 10 38.5% 26 Negative Frame 2 22.2% 0 0% 1 11.1% 6 66.6% 9 Mixed Frames 2 40% 1 20% 0 0% 2 40% 5 Total 13 32.5% 4 10% 5 12.5% 18 45% 40 Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 3.902 a 6 .690 Likelihood Ratio 5.221 6 .516 Linear-by-Linear Association .080 1 .777 N of Valid Cases 40 a. 10 cells (83.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .50.

PAGE 30

! 28 All of the chi-square tests as well as the directional lambda test show a statistical signif icance greater than .5 meaning that we can expect to see these same results by chance over half the time, proving the null hypothesis. I ran the same test with the other mea sure of success, overall new advantages: Directional Measures Val ue Asy mp. Std. Erro r a Approx. T b Approx. Sig. Nominal by Nominal Lambda Symmetric 000 .056 .000 1.000 Goal_Frame Dependent 000 .000 c c Com_Suc_Measure Dependent 000 .091 .000 1.000 Goodman and Kruskal tau Goal_Frame Dependent 048 .042 .715 d Com_Suc_Measure Dependent 035 .037 .666 d a. Not assuming the null hypothesis. b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis. c. Cannot be computed because the asymptotic standard error equals zero. d. Based on chi-square approximation

PAGE 31

! 29 Goal_Frame New_Advantages Crosstabulation Count New_Advantages Total None Equivocal New Advantages Partial & Peripheral Goal_Frame Positive Frame 9 34.6% 3 11.5% 13 50% 1 3.8% 26 Negative Frame 5 55% 0 0% 3 33.3% 1 11.1% 9 Mixed Frames 2 40% 0 0% 2 40% 1 20% 5 Total 16 40% 3 7.5% 18 45% 3 7.5% 40 Chi-Square Tests Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 4.454 a 6 .616 Likelihood Ratio 5.147 6 .525 Linear-by-Linear Association .002 1 .967 N of Valid Cases 40 a. 10 cells (83.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .38.

PAGE 32

! 30 Again, all of the chi-square tests as well as the directional lambda test show a statistical signicance greater than .5, meaning that we can expect to see these same results by chance over half the time, proving the null hypothesis. In neither case is there a statisti cally signicant relationship between goal framing and SMO success. Given the size of the sample and the results of this test, adding controls would not signicantly change the results. No further quantitative analysis of this data for this relationship is warrant ed. Analysis and Further Research: While it is clear that tests on Gamson's dataset did not show any signicant rela tionship, it would be premature to reject the possibility of discovering this relationship through further testing. Simply put, the size and makeup of his dataset, which was fur Directional Measures Valu e Asymp. Std. Error a Approx T b Appr ox. Sig. Nominal by Nominal Lambda Symmetric .056 .093 .580 .562 Goal_Frame Dependent .000 .000 c c New_Advantages Dependent .091 .150 .580 .562 Goodman and Kruskal tau Goal_Frame Dependent .070 .052 .484 d New_Advantages Dependent .029 .037 .750 d a. Not assuming the null hypothesis. b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis. c. Cannot be computed because the asymptotic standard error equals zero. d. Based on chi-square approximation

PAGE 33

! 31 ther limited by my coding of goals, was not likely to yield anything conclusive. Had tests on Gamson's dataset revealed a signicant relationship, I would similarly suggest that further research with substantially better data sources would be warranted. All that be ing said, the tests do not indicate that positively framed goals are detrimental to move ment success, an important distinction to make. Further research regarding positive and negative goal framing should address two different factors. Ultimately, my assertion is that positively framed goals will yield better policy outcomes with fewer unintended consequences. Comparing the policy outcomes of positive and negatively framed goals in and of itself could be difcult. Per haps examining policies that were designed and implemented within the same organiza tion might control for some of the noise that is inherent in the policy process. Even this would be difcult in that some negatively framed individual policies are connected to larger, positively framed initiatives, which I argue changes their character from that of negative master frames. Researching frame effects in social movements might prove easier, with Cress and Snow 's 2000 study of homelessness campaigns offering one approach to further study. Having worked professionally in the labor movement, I considered the possibili ties of making comparisons between union organizing campaigns conducted by the same union. Union campaign messaging, particularly the master frames, could be cod ed as positive and negative. Researchers could then control for the type of campaign i.e. organizing new workers, internal organizing, contract campaigns, etc. etc. the in dustry being organized, and other factors such as funding or stafng levels to see if there is a correlation between positively framed goals and campaign success. While

PAGE 34

! 32 union frames often are limited to the campaign they were intended for, and campaigns aren't always intended to affect the policies of external targets making them a poor t for suggestions that frames do persist into various policy processes, unions have very spe cic organizing methodologies executed by trained, experienced organizers. Because of this, examining union organizing would automatically control for a number of factors. The testing of goal framing on movement success is intended to see if positive frames contribute to or at the minimum don't detract from movement success, so that frames that are assumed to be benecial in the policy process can be adopted without fear of them undermining short-term movement success. To that end, unions offer a suitable test bed. Conclusion Despite the failure to detect a statistically signicant relationship between goal frames and movement outcomes, the possibility of predictable success through properly structured frames warrants further exploration. Organizers would rest easy knowing that properly crafted frames, while not guarantors of success, would at least limit the possibility of failure, particularly far-off policy failures which are hard to predict and undo. Similarly, policy makers who stick to positively dened goals could rest easy knowing that negative, unintended consequences would be somewhat mitigated by the positive frame. For those who lament the effects of frames on the populace at large, if positive frames proved superior, voters could learn to look askance at politicians who adopt negative frames for political expediency. Frames would cease being a tool of sophists and would instead be tools for the populace to separate the wheat from the chaff.

PAGE 35

! 33 WORKS CITED Amenta, Edwin and Caren, Neal, "The Legislative, Organizational, and Beneciary Consequences of State-Oriented Challengers," The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements, ed. by Snow, David, Soule, Sarah, and Kriesi, Hanspeter (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004) pp 461-488 Benford, Robert A. and Snow, David A., "Framing Processes and Social Movements: An Overview and Assessment." Annual Review of Sociology 26 (2000) pp 611-639 Birkland, Thomas, "Agenda Setting in Public Policy," Handbook of Public Policy Analysis ed. by Fischer, Frank, Miller, Gerald, and Sidney, Sara (Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2007) Bosso, Christopher J, "The Contextual Bases of Problem Denition," The Politics of Problem Denition, ed. by Rochefort, David and Cobb, Roger (Lawrence, KS: Univ. Press of KS, 1994) pp 182-203 Carrol, WK and Ratner, RS, "Master Frames and Counter-Hegemony: Political Sensibilities in Contemporary Social Movements," Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 33, 1996. pp 407-435 Chong, Dennis and Druckman, James N, "Framing Theory," Annual Review of Political Science 10 (2007) pp 103-26 Gamson, William, The Strategy of Social Protest (Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press, 1975) Gandhi, Mohandas K., Hind Swaraj or Indian Home Rule rst published in Indian Opinion, December 11 and 18, 1909, translated by Mahadev Desai (Lexington, KY: pothi.com, 2013) Gerhards, Jurgen and Rucht, Dieter, "Mesomobilization: Organizing and Framing in Two Protest Campaigns in West Germany," American Journal of Sociology 98:3 (Nov 1992) pp 555-596 Kang, Minah and Jang, Jiho, "NIMBY or NIABY? Who Denes a Policy Problem and Why: Analysis of Framing in Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility Placement in South Korea." Asia Pacic Viewpoint 54:1 (April 2013) pp 49-60 Manandhar, Shilu, "Evicted Once, Nepali Settlers Living in the Ruins of a Razed River Settlement Fear a Recurring Nightmare," Global Press Journal Nov 5, 2014, http://www.globalpressjournal.com/asia/nepal/evicted-once-nepali-squattersliving-ruins-razed, retrieved 4/29/15 Marullo, Sam, Pagnucco, Ron, and Smith, Jackie, "Frame Changes and Social Movement Contraction: US Peace Movement Framing After the Cold War," Sociological Inquiry 66:1 (February 1996) pp 1-28

PAGE 36

! 34 Nepal Mahila Ekata Samaj, "About Us," http://mahilaekata.org/about-us/ retrieved 4/25/15 Roberts, Michael, "Denver Police Protests: Eleven Arrests, Pepper Spray, Dead Cop' Sign," Westword, April 30, 2015, http://www.westword.com/news/denver-policeprotests-eleven-arrests-pepper-spray-dead-cop-sign-6672516, retrieved 4/30/15 Rochefort, David and Cobb, Roger, "Problem Denition: An Emerging Perspective," The Politics of Problem Denition, ed. by Rochefort, David and Cobb, Roger (Lawrence, KS: Univ. Press of KS, 1994) pp 1-31 Rochon, Thomas and Mazmanian, Daniel, "Social Movements and the Policy Process," Annals of American Academy of Political and Social Science 528 (July 1993) pp75-87 Sharp, Elaine, "National Antidrug Policymaking," The Politics of Problem Denition, ed. by Rochefort, David and Cobb, Roger (Lawrence, KS: Univ. Press of KS, 1994) pp 98-116 Sharp, Gene, Gandhi as a Political Strategist with Essays on Ethics and Politics (Boston: Porter Sargent Publishers, 1979) Silver, Ira, "Constructing Social Change' Through Philanthropy: Boundary Framing and the Articulation of Vocabularies of Motives for Social Movement Participation," Sociological Inquiry 67 (1997) pp 488-503 Sinha, Manisha and Gasper, Des, "How Can Power Discourses be Changed? Contrasting the Daughter Decit' Policy of the Delhi Government with Gandhi and King's Transformational Reframing," Critical Policy Studies 3:3-4 (Oct Dec 2009) pp 290-308 Snow, David, "Framing Processes, Ideology, and Discursive Fields," The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements, ed. by Snow, David, Soule, Sarah, and Kriesi, Hanspeter (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2004) pp 380-412 Snow, David and Benford, Robert, "Master Frames and Cycles of Protest." Frontiers in Social Movement Theory ed. by Mueller, Carol McClung and Morris, Aldon D. (New Haven, CT: Yale Univ. Press, 1992) pp 133-155 Snow, David, Rochford Jr., E. Burke, Worden, Steven, and Benford, Robert, "Frame Alignment Processes, Micromobilization, and Movement Participation," American Sociological Review 51:4 (August 1986) pp 464-481 Swart, William J., "The League of Nations and the Irish Question: Master Frames, Cycles of Protest, and Master Frame Alignment,'" The Sociological Quarterly 36:3 (Summer 1995) pp 465-481 Weber, Thomas, "Gandhi, Deep Ecology, Peace Research and Buddhist Economics," Journal of Peace Research 36:3 (May 1999) pp 349-361

PAGE 37

! 35 Zuo, Ziping and Benford, Robert, "Mobilization Processes and the 1989 Chinese Democracy Movement," The Sociological Quarterly 36:1 (January 1995) pp 131-156