Introduction
Framing is used to promote a particular problem; it recalls the audience’s values and speaks to them in understandable terms. It includes such strategies as convincing with fundamental frames, reframing from abstract to personal, and appealing to moral principles. Ryan and Gamson (2006) state that “framing involves a strategic dialogue intended to shape a particular group into a coherent movement” (p. 13). Framing analysis is the strategy that disclosures motivation, mission, or problem that requires an audience’s attention and actions. Entman (1993) claims that “analysis of frames illuminates the precise way in which influence over human consciousness is exerted by the transfer of information from its source to that consciousness” (p. 52). The analysis is used mostly to convince the audience from a political, cultural, or social viewpoint.
The elements to focus on during the framing analysis are the targeted audience, use of particular terms, recall to moral values, and rhetorical appeals. The framed text has to fit the audience, correlate with their culture and values. Lakoff (2004) points that most of the words are defined relative to any frame, and when a term negates, the frame evokes. Indeed, the key definitions should be identified and understood by the audience to persuade them properly. Lastly, rhetorical appeals, such as ethos, pathos, and logos, should be considered in the framing analysis to reveal whether a text is convincing.
Food Democracy Now! Website Framing Analysis
Food Democracy Now! is the community dedicated to creating a food system that protects the environment, provides appropriate nutrition for people, and sustains farmers (Food Democracy Now!, 2020). They bring to the notice the mission importance by claiming that the conditions of the food system are disastrous and reveal how each person’s life depends on it. The targeted audience is American citizens who agree that food systems demand revision. The terms like health and environment are used in framing related to food. The movement shares its founders’ stories containing scientific, agricultural, and governmental backgrounds of each, pointing to their authority. Reframing to personal is pathos, the movement’s mission is logos, and the authority of founders is an ethos to persuade.
The essential human right to live healthily is framed into the food production and consumption boundaries. Food Democracy Now! supporters believe the balance between agricultural aspects of food production and its final price can be achieved. The movement aims to reach that balance by recreating the local food system, respecting farmers’ labor, and making organic food more affordable. Food Democracy Now! values health, the farmers’ working rights, and the environment, therefore the community feels responsible for changing the food system, which cannot provide sustainable conditions for development. The framing of the broad term, such as rights, to the narrow food-related topic approach makes the movement’s statements persuasive. It recalls the basic needs of every individual and encourages them to influence food production and consumption issues.
Food Democracy Now! Targeted Comment
The mission of building a sustainable food production system needs to consider many factors. Firstly, it is necessary to find a balance in consumers’ demands and farmers’ opportunities. Then, the government must update regulations to give farmers more rights in producing and registering goods. Lastly, it is a consumer who requires more than the needs and causes issues such as the increasing volume of food waste. All American consumers need to ask themselves whether they want to eat better food at a reasonable price and decide in favor of Food Democracy.
Food Sovereignty Website Framing Analysis
The US Food Sovereignty Alliance (n.d.) builds “the movement to change the food economy and set the democratic control over the food system”. People involved in agriculture are the targeted audience, therefore the primary frame is the issues of this industry. Facts and statistics on the website convince that serious problems exist, and need attention. Many reports from events organized by the movement show that their values are shared among a vast number of citizens. They reveal the importance of the mission by using terms like justice, poverty, and labor, which recalls the audience’s moral values. Facts are the logos to convince the audience, recall to their values is pathos, and events involving many people who trust the movement are logos.
The movement aims to change the culture of food production in the US, because they believe that its defects cause environmental, health, and economic problems nationwide. Poverty and lack of justice for the working class are framed into the agricultural terms, and The US Food Sovereignty Alliance seeks solutions for these significant issues of the nation in better regulation for the farming system. They want to localize food production, evaluate the needs of regions, and help farmers in improving their production and harvesting methods to decrease the environmental damage. The movement’s vision of national problems observed from the point of agriculture motivates the audience to join because of the opportunity to get a better life not just for oneself, but for everyone. The framing strategy recalls the personal and moral values of every person who reaches the Alliance’s website and reveals their responsibility for the problems the nation struggles with.
Food Sovereignty Targeted Comment
The US Food Sovereignty Alliance aims to end poverty by reaching out to the government and get permission to localize food production, considering the needs and opportunities of particular states. The standards made to regulate agricultural production harm farmers’ performance. They are forced to use equipment that severely affects the environment, and their labor could receive more profit if localized. To achieve justice, more citizens need to be inspired by the values and ideas of food sovereignty.
References
Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of communication, 43(4), 51-58.
Food democracy now. (n.d.). Web.
Lakoff, G. (2004). A man of his words. AlterNet. Web.
Ryan, C., & Gamson, W. A. (2006). The art of reframing political debates. Contexts, 5(1), 13-18.
The US food sovereignty alliance. (n.d.). Web.