tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-83339842007-12-18T05:50:00.975-08:00George Lakoff :: Ling 290L :: Language of Politicsdanah boydBlogger39125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8333984.post-1102109266298285572004-12-02T19:24:00.000-08:002004-12-03T13:27:46.300-08:00final class meetingToday was the final class meeting (although there will be a party next week). The conversation was great and very multi-faceted. We started off with a discussion about the TV shows that were popular proceeding each election, noting the correlation and curious about the causality. More discussion on the environment. <a href="http://doc.weblogs.com/">Doc Searls</a> was visiting and he gave a wonderful talk on technology and how it connects into the political front. Check out the <a href="http://www.zephoria.org/lakoff/files/class13notes.txt">class notes</a>danah boydtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8333984.post-1101971390379577892004-12-01T23:09:00.000-08:002004-12-01T23:09:50.380-08:00class 13 notesMore notes from today - <a href="http://www.zephoria.org/lakoff/files/class13notes.txt">class 13</a>danah boydtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8333984.post-1101754937653314602004-11-29T10:57:00.001-08:002004-11-29T11:02:17.653-08:00classroom change announcementFor those in the class, Wednesday will be in Giannini 141 and the next two Thursdays will be in Morgan 109.danah boydtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8333984.post-1101754728414195722004-11-29T10:57:00.000-08:002004-11-29T10:58:48.413-08:00classroom change announcementFor those in the class, Wednesday will be in Giannini 141 and the next two Thursdays will be in Morgan 109.danah boydtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8333984.post-1101274278939857212004-11-23T21:30:00.000-08:002004-11-23T21:31:18.940-08:00class 12 notes<a href="http://www.zephoria.org/lakoff/files/class12notes.txt">Here's another round of notes from class!</a>danah boydtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8333984.post-1100718917290522992004-11-17T11:13:00.000-08:002004-11-17T11:15:17.290-08:00Depressed Democrats' Guide to RecoveryMake sure to check out: <a href="http://sfgate.com/columnists/fiore/">Depressed Democrats' Guide to Recovery</a>. It addresses many of the topics from yesterday - moving to Canada, finding moral grounding, etc.danah boydtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8333984.post-1100718726507256882004-11-17T11:09:00.000-08:002004-11-17T11:12:06.506-08:00class 11 notesLakoff is back and class resumed - <a href="http://www.zephoria.org/lakoff/files/class11notes.txt">here are the notes</a>. For the first half, we talked all over the place and in the second half, we focused on two people's projects (most of which i did not document). In many ways, Lakoff's job just got much harder because now people realize that they need him. Thus, he's spending a lot of time working with the Democrats. Should be exciting!
<br />
<br /><i>I should fully admit that my energy was low and talking about politics made my <a href="http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2004/11/14/declaring_ostrich.html">ostrich self</a> cringe.</i>danah boydtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8333984.post-1100157553691404702004-11-10T23:17:00.000-08:002004-11-10T23:19:13.693-08:00more shortly...We did not have class this Tuesday (which is why there are no notes). I wasn't able to attend class on November 2 (and neither was Mary). This blog is a product of love by us and represents the class conversations so without classes, there are no notes.
<br />
<br />On a personal level, i haven't been able to deal with election or post-election conversations, further explaining the absence of posting. Class will resume on Tuesday and i will add material then.danah boydtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8333984.post-1100500400618321062004-11-10T22:29:00.000-08:002004-11-14T22:33:33.500-08:00"The Persuaders"There was an interesting and relevant edition of Frontline this evening entitled "The Persuaders." (see below)
<br />
<br />It's over-arching focus was on advertising and the extent we're inundated by media messages. Our friend Frank Luntz showed up a few times and it was quiet interesting watching him in his element busily testing phrases and frames in real-time with focus groups.
<br />
<br />Right now PBS has the full text of all the interviews on the web site, and will have the program available for web streaming sometime on Friday (they say after 5:00pm EST). I think the startling thing is that Luntz is merely a (logical) extension of what Madison Avenue has been doing for decades.
<br />
<br />And they also examine what the Democrats did, how they used technology to connect Kerry to voters that helped him gain a leg up in the primaries and garner the nomination. Very interesting to see how they view "target marketing" of their messages to dozens of discrete sub-groups, tailoring their messages to the issues that they believe will matter to these groups... while acknowledging that the messages to some sub-groups may well be offensive to other sub-groups. While this may not categorically qualify as Orwellian use of language, it does (IMHO) appear to have a similar shaping of perceptions that is contrary to a broader reality. Probably more important is seeing how the progressives approach communicating their messages based on issues, while the conservatives look how people *feel* about broader macro-level concerns through values frames.
<br />
<br />One of the best (or most succinct) analogies between the two approaches was hearing historian Michael Beschloss describing how Ronald Reagan would be asked a policy question and he would subsequently respond with a story. He'd paint a picture with words to illustrate a political and/or moral position, and that resonated with middle America. I have a litany of reasons why I think that's the case, but point being, it serves as a good rough example of the distinction between focusing on morals and issues (the "truth" shall set you free).
<br />
<br />It also makes me wonder why is it that the party whose platform is deeply concerned with caring (and feeling) for the disenfranchised is yet so seemingly emotionally detached in their approach; while the party that is most concerned with competition and profits, whose members (seem to) assume that racism and poverty aren't systematic but predicated by how an individual looks at a situation, manages to resonate with people on an emotional level even when that alliance is arguably not in their own best interests.
<br />
<br />I wonder if there's something more cognitively at work here than the binary frame of Nurturant Parent v. Strict Father. I think on some level people understand competition and what it entails (it's 'in the frame'). There's unconscious rules of fairness, competitveness, what winning, failure, growth, etc. look like. However, I don't know if the same can be said of the majority of social programs. What is success? How is it achieved? How long will it take? How much will it cost? What's the most efficient way to do it? What's the most effective way to do it? Is it worth it in comparison to other alternatives?
<br />
<br />Maybe this dichotomy gives rise to cognitive dissonance that reinforces the competition frame while leaving the social program frame vulnerable. In fact, since most social programs are seen as "entitlements", do they not simultaneously reinforce the benefit (morally good) of the competition frame and the negative (immoral) of social programs?
<br />
<br />=============================================
<br />
<br /><a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/persuaders/">The Persuaders (home page)</a>
<br />
<br /><a href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/persuaders/themes/">The Persuaders: Themes</a>
<br />
<br />(from Duane Vickrey)danah boydtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8333984.post-1099289117047531952004-10-31T22:04:00.000-08:002004-10-31T22:05:17.046-08:00"The Orwellian Language of Big Government"Mentioned in class:
<br />
<br /><a href="http://www.ntu.org/main/press_papers.php?PressID=604&org_name=NTUF">"The Orwellian Language of Big Government" (National Taxpayers Union, June 22, 2004)</a>
<br />danah boydtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8333984.post-1099288925482799562004-10-31T22:01:00.000-08:002004-10-31T22:02:05.483-08:00location change for TuesdayTuesday's class will begin at 3.30 in 263 Dwinelle. Don't forget to vote!danah boydtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8333984.post-1098844122048234992004-10-26T19:25:00.000-07:002004-10-26T19:28:42.046-07:00class 9 notesMore adventures in classtime - <a href="http://www.zephoria.org/lakoff/files/class9notes.txt">class nine notes</a>. Most of today was dedicated to the topics that people were working on for their class assignment, with the issues around the Estate Tax and Proposition F in San Francisco dominating.danah boydtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8333984.post-1098248610956737202004-10-19T22:01:00.000-07:002004-10-19T22:12:12.133-07:00Jon Stewart on CrossfireIn today's class, we got into a fabulous discussion on Jon Stewart's reframing on the Crossfire show. If you haven't see it, *DO*
<br />
<br /><a href="http://www.onlisareinsradar.com/archives/002190.php#002190"><img src="http://www.zephoria.org/lakoff/files/crossfire.jpg" border="0"></a>
<br />
<br />(tx Lisa Rein)danah boydtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8333984.post-1098248280780966642004-10-19T21:55:00.000-07:002004-10-23T11:35:20.313-07:00class 8 notesAnother wonderful day in class, resulting in class 8 notes by <a href="http://www.zephoria.org/lakoff/files/class8notes-mary.txt">Mary</a> and <a href="http://www.zephoria.org/lakoff/files/class8notes=danah.txt">danah</a>. The conversation started out with an explicit discussion of Coturix's question, then dove into the New Lens' article and then spiraled off into the framing that Jon Stewart did on Crossfire before doing a comparison between the role of the comedian and the role of the blogger. A fantastic day!danah boydtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8333984.post-1098205449794675942004-10-19T10:00:00.000-07:002004-10-19T10:06:31.806-07:00Why are Post-Modernists/Deconstructionists considered to be the Left?<b><a href="http://www.blogger.com/profile/4312708">Coturnix</a> asked:</b> Why are Post-Modernists/Deconstructionists considered to be the Left? Is it their historical source, or they somehow fit into the Liberal system (perhaps on a big radial diversion away from the core). I find it difficult to align disdain for science and reality with the Nurturant Parent model.
<br />
<br /><b>Lakoff answered:</b> History: Paris 1968 student uprising. Marxist background.
<br />
<br />There are lots of different kinds of folks called postmodernists and deconstructionists. Stereotypical cases have the following properties relative to an NP analysis.
<br />
<br />Here is a parametrization (see Elephant, p. 89):
<br /><blockquote>Mode of thought: Anti-authoritarian (possibly added to other modes)
<br />Empathetic with: Victims of illegitimate authoritarian uses of power
<br />Idealist (not pragmatic)
<br />Means: Militant
<br />Time scale: Immediate
<br />Pace of change: Radical
<br />Means of inquiry: deconstruction, etc.</blockquote>
<br />
<br />Correctly saw the power to interpret as real power -- the power to impose an interpretation can change reality.
<br />
<br />How it differs from other forms of progressive thought:
<br />
<br />Identified fixed interpretation (either author's intention, structural analysis, or new criticism) as an illegitimate authoritarian use of power (the power to interpret). Saw deconstruction/postmodernism as a means to power (the power to interpret). Saw "theory" as a way to legitimate their interpretive power. Also saw it (within the academy) as a way to gain social capital (cf. Bourdieu).
<br />
<br />Some saw also science as "scientism" -- an illegitimate authoritarian use of power.
<br />
<br />Certain cases were a pathological variant -- not nurturant but permissive, lacking responsibility (to reality, to community, to others with different views).
<br />
<br /><b><a href="http://www.blogger.com/profile/4312708">Coturnix</a> asked:</b> The same question on "Animal Rightists" (as opposed to "animal welfare" people which are clearly core liberals)? Is it just a huge radial deviation from the core? Their mindset (and tactics) reminds me more of anti-choice people than anti-war people.
<br />
<br /><b>Lakoff answered:</b> Again: They are militant in means, idealists, and for immediate radical change -- like the pro-lifers.danah boydtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8333984.post-1098141957669600662004-10-15T16:23:00.000-07:002004-10-18T16:27:32.550-07:00New Lenses for Your Frames<a href="http://www.georgelakoff.com/LivingWage.pdf">New Lenses for Your Frames: An Analysis of The Framing of Living Wage</a> was referenced in class as important to read.
<br />
<br /><blockquote>Editor's Note: Framing can be a complex discipline requiring years of study, focus group polling, analysis, research and target audience testing. Professional communications analysts and practitioners have devoted much resources and time to this study. This section of the "Winning Wages" guidebook presents both quick spot-framing tips (see previous article) and more in-depth framing analysis. In this piece by noted academic researcher, progressive political thinker, author and cognitive science expert George Lakoff, we discover a more detailed analysis of framing for living wage. The first part focuses on the basic frames of living wage for those who want that specific focus. The second part goes beyond living wage into a "moral economy."</blockquote>danah boydtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8333984.post-1097643939931574182004-10-12T22:02:00.000-07:002004-10-12T22:05:39.933-07:00Class 7 notesToday, Mary and i decided we'd both take notes:
<br /><a href="http://www.zephoria.org/lakoff/files/class7notes-mary.txt">Version Mary</a>
<br /><a href="http://www.zephoria.org/lakoff/files/class7notes-danah.txt">Version danah</a>
<br />
<br />I fear this may give you dear reader an understanding of our different interests and attention spans.
<br />
<br />Anyhow, the focus of today was supposed to be on <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1931498717/apophenia-20">"Don't Think of an Elephant"</a> but it was really hard not to consistently derail and talk about the debates. For those who haven't read Lakoff's newest book - do! It provides excellent examples of how to politely alter the minds of all conservatives.danah boydtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8333984.post-1097189651576614862004-10-07T15:52:00.000-07:002004-10-07T16:55:56.080-07:00George W. Bush :: Keeping America Scared<a href="http://home.earthlink.net/~houval/gopconstrm.mov"><img src="http://www.andreaharner.com/archives/KeepingAmericaScared.jpg"></a>
<br />
<br />(via <a href="http://joi.ito.com/archives/2004/10/02/terizm_terizm_terizm.html">Joi</a>)danah boydtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8333984.post-1097190770117410802004-10-05T22:11:00.000-07:002004-10-07T16:12:50.116-07:00Class 6 notesToday's visitor was from the Rockridge Institute. For the most part, today was spent discussing last week's debate with people airing their personal views. <a href="http://www.zephoria.org/lakoff/files/class6notes.txt">Here are the notes that i took.</a>danah boydtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8333984.post-1096941420010274482004-10-04T18:56:00.000-07:002004-10-04T19:18:32.066-07:00Giving People Information to Get Them to See<a href="http://www.zephoria.org/lakoff/2004/10/notes-from-class-5.html">Democrats have a false theory of the electorate.. and of how people vote: give people the facts and they will reach the right conclusion.. and they see framing as spin... and resist it..</a> -- from the Class 5 notes
<br />
<br />This particular statement made in class last Tuesday reminded me of what I often heard journalism students and the occasional visiting professional journalist giving a lecture at the <a href="http://journalism.berkeley.edu">JSchool</a> at UCBerkeley say, though they were speaking from the journalistic model, not the voting model. It would always make me stop then too. It's the idea that given the right information, people will choose wisely (code word for the 'right' way, which is the way the speaker thinks is right). In a way, the theory is understandable in that given better information, people will make better decisions. But economists know this doesn't happen. Given lower pricing, many people do not buy the generic brand over the branded brand even though the same manufacturer may have made it. And given the right information, or the facts, people do not necessarily choose a particular course of action, for one reason or another.
<br />
<br />It might be due to their perception that the facts as delivered by either liberals or journalists is incorrect, to be disregarded because the fact don't fit the person's framework of life, are not trustworthy for some other reason, or are less trustworthy than some other conflicting fact. But it may also be because people don't like being condescended to, don't like being told what is right or good or correct. I believe this is one of the issues top down media currently faces today: the masses, who were supposed to be reading newspapers and getting the right info so they could make the right decisions and be 'well-informed', realized some time ago that newspapers in their old form were in one way or another out of touch with their lives and what they needed from their information deliverers. It might have been the paper-paper delivery, the generalist nature of the coverage, or the occasional journalist whose lack of humility or disregard for the truth or the intelligence of those they were reporting for just didn't sit well with the great unwashed. But when media has screwed up, anger toward top-down media has showed up in some surprising ways, and at least for me, and the few that I've spoken with, the anger and distrust comes in part from the sense of condescension we've felt. Liberal views of knowing what's best have also provoked this same sort of anger in the public. That's not to say that I or those I've talked with about this are libertarians.. though there is some flavor of it there, balanced by other sensibilities that government has a responsibility to control certain things for all of us, whether we like it or not (keeping industrial pollution regulated, making everyone stop at stop signs, providing education -- though you probably realize that I see us doing a better job on the stop signs and falling down with our responsibility to kids and the environment).
<br />
<br />So does better information matter? Absolutely, as does education, so that people understand many ways of looking at fact, theory and argument. But I don't believe that given better information, people will the see 'the light', especially the one particular light the information giver wants to make people to see. Yes, some will see it, but the most responsible thing to do is to give people honest information no matter what position it supports and let them make up their own minds. It's why I love blogging and other newer forms of online information passing. It may not always be right.. it maybe require us to be continuously asking about whether the information appears true, whether we trust the purveyor, or should put our trust in the search for information that is more truthful. But expecting others to get some particular notion afterward is condescending, and will never get the liberals, or top down journalists, a considered place at the table of most folks. Because the bristling nature of that condescension just makes people feel funny and that leads to distrust. But sharing information across many information sources, blogs and top-down media online, and wikis and via word of mouth, gives us the opportunity to lose the condescension so that we do our own fact checking and be apart of the process of getting the best information for the sake of getting the best information no matter what its provenance. mary hoddertag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8333984.post-1096716814683592782004-10-02T04:24:00.000-07:002004-10-02T04:33:34.683-07:00probabilityThis week's class was particularly interesting to me because of the discussion of how people do not rationalize according to probability. Using my terms, they appear to interpolate using coarse descriptors.
<br />
<br />Example: which is more probable: a earthquake in California resulting in a tidal wave that will kill 1000 people OR an earthquake in North America that will kill 1000 people.
<br />
<br />More people choose the former, even though the latter is more probable. Why? Because one's conception of North America is basically Nebraska and what earthquakes exist in Nebraska? Obviously, earthquakes are a California thing.
<br />
<br />We also discussed empathy at length, conversing about different research on how empathy operates in the brain. Basically, you have until about the age of 5 to build empathy. In a strict father culture, empathy is not something that is nurtured and thus it tends to die away. This devolved into a conversations about whether or not libertarians were the ultimate un-empathetic creatures...
<br />danah boydtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8333984.post-1096615604833682732004-10-01T01:23:00.000-07:002004-10-01T00:28:51.066-07:00putting the Bush daughers on a leashA bothersome <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/01/politics/campaign/01dtext.html?pagewanted=print&position=">quote from the debate</a>:
<br />
<br /><blockquote>Mr. Kerry Well, first of all, I appreciate enormously the personal comments the president just made, and I share them with him. I think only if you've - if you're doing this, and he's done it more than I have in terms of the presidency, can you begin to get a sense of what it means to your families. And it's tough. And so I acknowledge - his daughters, I've watched them, I've chuckled a few times at some of their comments. And -
<br />
<br />Mr. Bush Trying to put a leash on them.
<br />
<br />Mr. Kerry Well, I know - I've learned not to do that. And I have great respect and admiration for his wife. I think she's a terrific person -</blockquote>
<br />
<br />Bush is trying to put a leash on his daughters? Oh dear. Right... women don't count.
<br />
<br />(Tx coturnix)danah boydtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8333984.post-1096616250660453832004-10-01T00:31:00.000-07:002004-10-01T00:37:30.666-07:00Notes from Class 5Here are the <a href="http://www.zephoria.org/lakoff/files/class5notes.txt">notes from Tuesday's class</a>. Please excuse the lateness.mary hoddertag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8333984.post-1096394608320951892004-09-28T11:01:00.000-07:002004-09-28T11:03:28.320-07:00"Is Nothing Sacred?"AlterNet has an article about environmental policy and political moral structures that used Lakoff-style arguments. It's called <a href="http://www.alternet.org/envirohealth/19994/">"Is Nothing Sacred?"</a> Go Tai Moses!danah boydtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8333984.post-1096336923243810462004-09-27T14:59:00.000-07:002004-09-27T19:02:03.243-07:00"How Kerry lost me"This class is heavily invested in the language that is being used in this current election. Much of our conversation centers around Kerry vs. Bush (and frankly, how much Kerry is fucking up). Given this angle, i was quite interested in Ann Althouse's entry entitled <a href="http://althouse.blogspot.com/2004_09_26_althouse_archive.html#109622676011608698">How Kerry lost me</a>. In it, she analyzes what Kerry has said over this campaign and why she is not voting for him. While it is not a Lakoff-styled analysis, it connects well with this class.danah boyd