Pamela E. Oliver
Professor of Sociology

Soc 924 – Framing

Symbolic Content: Ideology, Discourse, Frames, Framing and their Critics

“Frame theory” became almost hegemonic for a while as a way of talking about ideas in social movements, and the majority of articles published in the area use these ideas, either uncritically or critically. There are other theoretical approaches to talking about ideas, including concepts of discourse, narrative.

  • One older line is “functions of ideology,” the mechanisms of how ideas are important in movements, represented in section I. Snow/Benford 1988 is very widely cited for this functional trichotomy, and I think it is important to trace the ideas to their origin in Wilson’s 1973 work. I think you should know this line and the history of the ideas but I don’t know whether we need to discuss it in class.
  • Another line is revisiting the relation between framing as the strategic use of language to persuade and the older and larger literature on ideology. The Oliver/Johnston vs Snow/Benford exchange represents my intervention is this literature and my working definition of ideology, which I should note is NOT how most theorists of ideology think of it. You can see that the Snow work subsequent to this intervention e.g. the 2004 piece addresses issues of ideology and the older traditions. The Westby 2002 piece also works with these ideas in a very different way.
  • A lot of work examines the strategic dynamics of framing or discourse, considering how actors fit themselves into a discursive space and how the “framing” is affected by the flow of events and political context. I have put (*)’s by the Ferree 2003, Eillingson 1995 and Steinberg 1999 pieces as exemplars of empirical work that takes a more dynamic and strategic approach and suggest that you at least skim all of these and give a close read to at least one of them.

Themes to focus on in the readings:

  • what frames and framing are,
  • framing as a conscious activity by movement activists versus unconscious sets of assumptions,
  • links to concepts of ideology,
  • how frames connect with strategies, political opportunities,
  • alternate theoretical conceptions of discourses etc. how frames differ from identities and other ideational concepts.

I think class discussion might be most fruitful if people tried to think about how these ideas relate to particular movements you know something about. Click here for key to abbreviations referring to collections — CP, BC, MM etc.

Index

Overviews

  1. (*) Chapter 3. “The Symbolic Dimension of Collective Action.” Social Movements : An Introduction. Donatella Della Porta and Mario Diani. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. (Second or Third edition) Postmaterialism, cognitive praxis, interpretive frames. Discussion of frame theory as cognitive praxis.
  2. Paul Almeida Social Movements: The Structure of Collective Mobilization. Chapter 5 “The Framing Process”
  3. David Snow, Rens Vliegenthart, Pauline Katelaars. 2019. Chapter 22. “The Framing Perspective in Social Movements: Its Conceptual Roots and Architecture.” in Snow et al, The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Social Movements. Development of framing perspective, collective action frames, master frames, core framing tasks, discursive processes, framing mechanisms, discursive fields & opportunity structures, frame crystallization, frame alignment, frame resonance, framing hazards,
  4. Snow, David A. (2004). Framing Processes, Ideology and Discursive Fields. The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements. D. A. Snow, S. A. Soule and H. Kriesi. Malden, MA and Oxford, UK, Blackwell Publishing: 380-412. Historical view that picks up older critiques of concept of ideology. Digs into ideas of ideology and framing. Summary of framing literature: distinguishing collective action frames from everyday frames. Empirical work and theoretical elaborations: frames as properties of organizations, master frames, frames and independent and dependent, frame transformations. Connecting ideology, frames, discursive fields: problematizing ideology, discursive process of frame articulation and elaboration, discursive fields and opportunity structures
  5. Robert Benford and David Snow. Framing Processes and Social Movements: An Overview and Assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 2000, 26, 611-639. Reviews scholarship on collective action frames & framing processes in relation to social movements, with focus on the analytic utility of this literature for understanding social movement dynamics. An attempt is made to provide clarification of the linkages between framing concepts/processes & other conceptual & theoretical formulations relevant to social movements, eg, schemas & ideology. An excellent review. It is also very dense. I suggest reading it over lightly to understand the terrain it covers, and then keeping it as a reference for later review and/or using it as a pointer to other research to read. PDF file
  6. Tarrow, Power in Movement, chapter 7.

Consensus mobilization & general discussions of functions of ideology 

An older tradition, exemplified by John Wilson’s 1973 textbook, outlined the functions of ideology: diagnosis (what is the problem), prognosis (what is the cause), call to action. These ideas were picked up and repacked with other concepts by Klandermans in “consensus mobilization” and Snow/Benford in “framing tasks.” Later scholars cited Snow/Benford for the three-pronged “tasks” idea, not its originator, John Wilson. If you are interested in digging seriously into this area, I think it is worth taking a good look at the relation among these different ways of trying to theorize the same idea, as well as considering whether Wilson’s ideas were improved or just repackaged. Note also that there are long traditions in the study of ideology itself that are not represented in these readings.

  1. John Wilson, Social Movements (1973): Chapter 3, “Mobilization of Discontent.” A direct influence on the Klandermans concept of consensus mobilization and on Snow & Benford’s 1988 discussion of framing tasks. 1) PDF file (portrait) 3.5MB Will appear sideways on the screen. Will print out OK 2) PDF file (landscape) 3.5 MB will appear OK on screen but may print improperly depending on settings.
  2. David Snow and Robert Benford. 1988. “Ideology, Frame Resonance, and Participant Mobilization.” International Social Movement Research 1: 197-217. framing tasks and constraints on framing. Nice review of analytic dimensions of ideology. Note that the analytic dimensions of ideology is taken from John Wilson’s 1973 Social Movements text, see above. PDF
  3. Bert Klandermans. 1988. “The Formation and Mobilization of Consensus.” International Social Movement Research 1: 173-196. [cites Kriesi 1986 that NSM are rooted in dense counter-cultural networks and thus can have loose structures. cf CRM] consensus mobilization is the creation of shared views of movement issues (vs action mobilization to act). Wide-ranging review of functionalist requirements for content of ideologies (building on Wilson) as well as sources of communication and credibility. Example of decline in opinion after counter-campaign. Useful overview. PDF
  4.  

Frames & Framing

Agenda-setting articles

  1. *David Snow et al., “Frame Alignment Processes,” ASR 51 (1986): 464-481. The first and most influential piece: movement actors try to bring their movement’s frame into alignment with other’s ideas so that they will join or support the movement. in MS & BC. Also JSTOR.
  2. David Snow and Robert Benford. 1988 “Ideology, Frame Resonance, and Participant Mobilization.” International Social Movement Research, Vol. 1, pages 197-217. Supplement to Research in Social Movements, Conflict and Change. PDF
  3. For comparison see John Wilson 1973 Chapter 3 “The Mobilization of Discontent” in Introduction to Social Movements. Pages 91-134 are about ideology.  PDF file (portrait) 3.5MB Will appear sideways on the screen. Will print out OK 2) PDF file (landscape) 3.5 MB will appear OK on screen but may print improperly depending on settings.
  4. Hank Johnston. “Antecedents of Coalition: Frame Alignment and Utilitarian Unity in the Catalan Anti- Francoist Opposition.” Research in Social Movements, Conflicts and Change 13: 241-259. 1991. Broad unity among Catholics and Marxists and among different ethnic groups and classes arose as four frame alignment processes converged on a master frame. Link to PDF
  5. David Snow and Robert Benford. 1992. “Master Frames and Cycles of Protest.” In Morris and Mueller, Frontiers of Social Movement Theory. How broad frames like “rights” characterize protest cycles. BC 456-472.
  6. Robert Benford. 1993. “Frame Disputes within the Nuclear Disarmament Movement.” Social Forces 71: 677-702. Debates inside the peace movement about how they would view their issue and present themselves to others.Stable URL:
  7. Babb, Sarah “A True American System of Finance”: Frame Resonance in the U.S. Labor Movement, 1866 to 1886. American Sociological Review; 1996, 61, 6, Dec, 1033-1052. Collective action frames are defined as the ideological tools that organize experience, assess problems, & offer solutions for the members of social movements. The power of a given frame to attract & mobilize constituents is dependent on frame resonance. Greenbackism appealed to the labor movement on two levels: to constituents suffering from unemployment, & through continuity with the larger “producerist” master frame, which governed the collective action frame of labor movement. Stable URL in JSTOR
  8. Johnston, H. (1995). A Methodology for Frame Analysis: From Discourse to Cognitive Schemata. Social Movements and Culture. H. Johnston and B. Klandermans. Minneapolis, MN, U of Minnesota Press: 217-246.

Critiques & alternatives

  1. Entman, Robert. 1993. “Framing: Toward a Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm.” Journal of Communication. Link Discussion of the frame concept within communication studies. Emphasizes that different groups are using the terms differently.
  2. Robert Benford. 1997. An Insider’s Critique of the Social Movement Framing Perspective. Sociological-Inquiry; 1997, 67, 4, fall, 409-430.PDF file
  3. (*) Steinberg, M. W. (1998). “Tilting the Frame: Considerations on Collective Action Framing from a Discursive Turn.” Theory and Society 27(6 Dec): 845-872. Critiques the view of discourse offered by frame analysis, proposing an alternative framework based on analysis of discursive repertoires. Drawing on Bakhtin circle’s discourse literary theory & sociocultural psychology, a “model of discursive repertoires” describes discourse as an ideological process driven by inner dialectic tensions connected to specific sociocultural contexts & patterns of interaction. PDF file
  4. *Steinberg, M. W. (1999). “The Talk and Back Talk of Collective Action: A Dialogic Analysis of Repertoires of Discourse among Nineteenth-Century English Cotton Spinners.” American Journal of Sociology 105(3): 736-780. Critiques framing perspectives on collective action discourse, offering an alternative dialogic approach that sees collective action discourse as a joint product of actors’ agency & discourse dynamics, including its multivocal nature. Such discourse is a joint product of challengers’ rational actions & the constraints of the discursive field. PDF
  5. (*)”What a Good Idea: Frames and Ideologies in Social Movements Research.” (Pamela E. Oliver and Hank Johnston) Mobilization: An International Journal 5 (1 April) 2000: 37-54. A copy of this article + Snow & Benford’s reply and our rejoinder are posted on my web page. Debate about over-use of term “frame.”
  6. “Hot Movements, Cold Cognition: Thinking about Social Movements in Gendered Frames” Ferree, Myra Marx and Merrill, David A. Contemporary-Sociology; 2000, 29, 3, May, 454-462. PDF file A short essay which distinguishes among frame, ideology, discourse.
  7. (*)Westby, D. L. (2002). “Strategic Imperative, Ideology, and Frame.” Mobilization 7(3): 287-304. Framing is (1) a derivative of ideology & (2) a form of strategic meaning construction; these are jointly incorporated in persuasive discourse. At least six distinct forms of framing differ in how ideology & the strategic imperative are bundled together, affect movements differently. PDF

Frames and Political Opportunities or Strategic Interactions

  1. Diani, Mario “Linking Mobilization Frames and Political Opportunities: Insights from Regional Populism in Italy” American Sociological Review; 1996, 61, 6, Dec, 1053-1069. Cross-classifying two variables – the stability of political alignments & the opportunities for autonomous action within the polity – yields four types of political structures; each is particularly conducive to different master frames (antisystem, inclusion, revitalization, & realignment). Resources become more effective if the strategies they support are framed in a way consistent with the master frame & the opportunity structure. Stable URL:
  2. * Myra Marx Ferree “Resonance and Radicalism: Feminist Framing in the Abortion Debates of the United States and Germany.” American Journal of Sociology 2003, Volume 109 Number 2 (September 2003): 304–44 US and German discursive contexts make the ideas that are “resonant” in one context “radical” in another. Not everyone tries to resonate, some prefer to take a radical position. Develops idea of discursive opportunity structure.
  3. McCarthy, J. D., J. Smith, et al. (1996). Accessing Public, Media, Electoral, and Governmental Agendas. CP Concerned with specifying the social structural contexts that condition movement framing efforts, and condition the repertoires of tactics within these structures. Groups with more resources tend to use more “insider” tactics. The article links the agenda-setting literature with ideas of strategy and tactics.
  4. Oberschall, A. (1996). Opportunities and Framing in the Eastern European Revolts of 1989. CP: 93-121. Framing processes determine the perception of political opportunities. Case histories of the anti-communist revolutions in Poland, Hungary, East Germany, and Czechoslovakia. Emphasizes crowds rather than organizations in the revolts.
  5. Zdravomyslova, E. (1996). Opportunities and Framing in the Transition to Democracy: The Case of Russia. CP: 122-137. Describes the phases of the Leningrad revolt, stressing shifts in police responses over time, and the changing frames and tactics of the movement as it grew in strength. Police initially repress.
  6. Gamson, W. A. and D. S. Meyer (1996). Framing Political Opportunity. CP: 273-290. The perception of political opportunity is framed.
  7. McAdam, D. (1996). The Framing Function of Movement Tactics: Strategic Dramaturgy in the American Civil Rights Movement. CP: 338-355. A summary of the civil rights movement as strategic dramaturgy. The key is that tactics are frames and there are frames about tactics, that a key were battles over the interpretation of tactics as legal or illegal, moral or immoral.
  8. Rita Noonan. “Women Against the State: Political Opportunities and Collective Action Frames in Chile’s Transition to Democracy.” MS 252-267. Sociological Forum 10: 81-111. 1995. Historical in-depth case study, how & why women mobilized against the state in Chile. The manner in which ideology & cultural themes are framed may provide opportunities for protest, the rise & fall of broader mobilizational frames or master frames shapes how movement-specific frames compete, decay, & transform.
  9. Cadena-Roa, J. (2002). “Strategic Framing, Emotions, and Superbarrio-Mexico City’s Masked Crusader.” Mobilization 7(2): 201-216 .Copy in on-line reserves . Spontaneous & emotional dimensions of social protest, & the expressive dimensions of constructing movement identities. A”party mood” that prevailed in a Mexico City social movement organization, the Asamblea de Barrios, created the conditions for the emergence of Superbarrio, a masked crusader for justice who used humor & dramaturgy drawn from wrestling culture to help the urban poor confront the corruption & mismanagement of the Mexican state. Framing has emotional components, inspired resistance.

Discourse & Narrative

  1. Williams, Rhys H. (2004). The Cultural Contexts of Collective Action: Constraints, Opportunities, and the Symbolic Life of Social Movements. The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements. D. A. Snow, S. A. Soule and H. Kriesi. Malden, MA and Oxford, UK, Blackwell Publishing: 91-115. Summary of different cultural approaches to the question of symbolic meaning construction in movements. Invokes the criteria of boundedness (what is in the culture and what is not) and resonance (salience and applicability of cultural elements) for exlanations. Elaborates boundedness and public power, resonance and cultural power, then intersection of boundedness and resonance. (I’m going to have to read this more carefully to follow his key arguments)
  2. *Stephen Ellingson. “Understanding the Dialectic of Discourse and Collective Action: Public Debate and Rioting in Antebellum Cincinnati.” American Journal of Sociology 101: 100-144. 1995. MS 268-280. Constructivist approaches demonstrate how discourse makes some forms of action possible & legitimate &, conversely, how collective action transforms the meaning & structure of discourse. Two incidents of mob violence in Cincinnati interrupted the discursive struggle over abolitionism, undermining some diagnoses & solutions, while making others more compelling. Speakers incorporated the events into their discourses. Stable URL:
  3. *Steinberg, M. W. (1999). “The Talk and Back Talk of Collective Action: A Dialogic Analysis of Repertoires of Discourse among Nineteenth-Century English Cotton Spinners.” American Journal of Sociology 105(3): 736-780. Critiques framing perspectives on collective action discourse, offering an alternative dialogic approach that sees collective action discourse as a joint product of actors’ agency & discourse dynamics, including its multivocal nature. Such discourse is a joint product of challengers’ rational actions & the constraints of the discursive field. PDF
  4. Ann Swidler. “Culture in Action: Symbols and Strategies”. American Sociological Review, Vol. 51, No. 2. (Apr., 1986), pp. 273-286. PDF fileA very useful treatment of cultural approaches to social movements.
  5. Kane, A. (1991). “Cultural Analysis in Historical Sociology: The Analytic and Concrete Forms of the Autonomy of Culture.” Sociological Theory 9 (1, spring): 53-69. How to discuss cultural autonomy without reductionism PDF file
  6. Kane, A. (2000). “Reconstructing Culture in Historical Explanation: Narratives as Cultural Structure and Practice.” History and Theory 39(3, Oct.): 311-330. Argues that meaning construction is at the nexus of culture, social structure, & social action, & must be the explicit target of investigation into the cultural dimension of historical explanation. Empirical analysis of political alliance during the Irish Land War, 1879-1882, uncover meaning construction by analyzing the symbolic structures & practices of narrative discourse. PDF file
  7. (*) Kane, A. E. (1997). “Theorizing Meaning Construction in Social Movements: Symbolic Structures and Interpretation during the Irish Land War, 1879-1882.” Sociological Theory 15(3, Nov): 249-276. Argues in contrast to the “tool kit” perspective on culture that meaning is located in the structure of culture, the metaphoric nature of symbolic systems, & individual & collective interpretations of those systems in the context of concrete events, drawing on textual analysis of meaning construction during the Irish Land War, 1879-1882. Social movement theory must investigate the metaphoric logic of symbolic systems & the interpretive process by which individuals construct meaning. PDF file
  8. km-3. Jane Jenson. “Changing Discourse, Changing Agendas: Political Rights and Reproductive Policies in France.” Talk about alliances, content of debates for 3 issues (inter-war suffrage, inter-war birth control, 1970s abortion). no explicit research methodology but lots of talk about whose ideas were connect to whose, and distinctions, subdivisions. useful.
  9. Moaddel, Monsoor. (1992). “Ideology as Episodic Discourse: The Case of the Iranian Revolution.” American Sociological Review 57(3): 353-379. Critiques subjectivist, organizational, Marxist models of ideology & revolution. Instead revolutionary ideology is episodic discourse, a language for expressing & disseminating ideas about social problems & seeking solutions to them in a particular historical episode. PDF file
  10. Myra Marx Ferree. “Political Strategies and Feminist Concerns in the Untied States and Federal Republic of Germany: Class, Race and Gender.” Research in Social Movements, Conflicts and Change 13: 221-240. 1991. US feminism guided by race analogy, while Germany feminism by the conflict between gender and class politics. Discourses around employment policy, reproductive rights, and women in military vary; political culture important.
  11. km-8. Myra Ferree. “Equality and Autonomy: Feminist Politics in the United States and West Germany.” difference in type, each is strong in ways, weak in ways. US liberal, Germany radical.
  12. km-3. Jane Jenson. “Changing Discourse, Changing Agendas: Political Rights and Reproductive Policies in France.” Talk about alliances, content of debates for 3 issues (inter-war suffrage, inter-war birth control, 1970s abortion). no explicit research methodology but lots of talk about whose ideas were connect to whose, and distinctions, subdivisions. useful.
  13. Ron Eyerman and Andrew Jamison. Social Movements: A Cognitive Approach. 1991. Pennsylavaia State University Press. Social movements as cognitive praxis, as generators of new ideas and knowledge.
  14. McLeod, Doug, and Benjamin Detenber. 1999. “Framing Effects of Television News Coverage of Social Protest.” Journal of communication. Link
  15. Berbrier, Mitch. 2002. “Making Minorities: Cultural Space, Stigma Transformation Frames, and the Categorical Status Claims of Deaf, Gay, and White Supremacist Activists in Late Twentieth Century America.” Sociological Forum. Link 
  16. Ferree, Myra M. 2003. “Resonance and Radicalism: Feminist Framing in the Abortion Debates of the United States and Germany.” American Journal of Sociology. Link
  17. Hon, Linda. 2016. “Social Media Framing within the Million Hoodies Movement for Justice.” Public Relations Review. LinkLinks to an external site.

Key to abbreviations

  • km=Mary F. Katzenstein and Carol M. Mueller, Women’s Movements of the US and Europe. 1987. Temple University Press.
  • MS=Doug McAdam and David Snow, editors. Social Movements: Readings on their Emergence, Mobilization, and Dynamics. Roxbury Press. 1997. A very current collection as of its publication, emphasizing important empirical articles. The print is small, but this is an efficient way to acquire a lot of widely-cited articles.
  • BC=Steven Buechler and F. Kurt Cylke, Jr., editors. Social Movements: Perspectives and Issues. Mayfield Publishing Company. 1997. A fine collection which gives good coverage to older theories, coverage to more politicized theory, and also includes some of the important empirical articles. BC in the syllabus.
  • CP=D. McAdam, J. D. McCarthy and M. N. Zald. Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements: Political Opportunities, Mobilizing Structures, and Cultural Framings.. New York, Cambridge University Press 1996 (CP in syllabus) A conference volume that is largely repetitive of the contributors’ prior work, but which provides useful syntheses of their work.