FRAME: Social Progress

As funding and budgets flat line at the National Institutes of Health, science organizations are hoping to make NIH funding part of the election discussion. In a smart way, they are framing the issue in terms of social progress with the catchphrase "Science Cures," making personally relevant the value of basic research. Below is a press release from FASEB announcing their new election-oriented Web site at http://sciencecures.org/. AS 2008 PRESIDENTIAL RACE HEATS UP, FASEB LAUNCHES VOTER EDUCATION INITIATIVE SCIENCECURES.ORG Bethesda, MD - The Federation of American Societies for Experimental…

To date, nanotechnology has followed a public trajectory similar to that of plant biotechnology in the United States. Relatively low levels of attention have been paid to the still nascent issue in the media, with coverage concentrated at the science and business beats. This coverage has been framed heavily in social progress and economic development terms with a few stories focusing on elements of the uncertainty of possible risks and/or regulatory matters involving the accountability of industry and scientists. Given low amounts of media attention and the heavy focus on the promise of…

With the semester finally winding down, over the weekend, I updated the tabs "What is Framing?" and "Popular Science vs. Framing." These new sections of my blog explain in detail research on framing and media influence and also present a generalizable typology of frames that re-appear across science debates. Both tabs include bibliographies of recommended literature.

In a column last year, I detailed the historical trajectory in the U.S. of frames on nuclear energy, with images moving from very positive interpretations centered on social progress and economic development during the 1950s and 1960s to a very negative focus on public accountability and a Pandora's Box of unknown disaster in the 1970s. These frames were locked in by the Three Mile Island accident in 1977, and reinforced in the 1980s by the Chernobyl disaster. Since TMI, no new nuclear reactors have been built in the U.S., and public support for nuclear energy has never moved above 50%. Yet…

In the days before the House vote to fund embryonic stem cell research, the Washington Post and Los Angeles Times ran page one stories heralding a Nature Biotech study that indicated stem cells extracted from amniotic fluid might have "near pluripotent" like properties. Yet, despite the heavy attention from its competitive rivals, the New York Times was silent on the study. (For a full roundup.) Not soon after the front page headlines appeared, as I predicted, the White House and various anti-abortion groups jumped on the study to claimed that it offered an important "middle way." Given the…

This week all eyes will be on Capitol Hill as Nancy Pelosi and the newly elected House majority push for stem cell legislation that would override President George W. Bush's tight limits on research funding. Supporters will need to achieve a super majority in both houses in order to stave off a Bush veto. The Center for American Progress estimates that backers of the bill might be as many as 40 votes shy of a 2/3 majority in the House, but perhaps only one vote shy in the Senate. Both sides in the debate are geared up for a major political communication battle, and in a new "Science and…

Genetech is running ads in the NY Times, The New Yorker, and on their Web site that feature patients offering testimonials framed in social progress terms. The campaign is similar to the Bristol Myers Squib TV ads I described here. In a smart strategic move, the ad campaign "re-frames" the issue of biotech drugs away from the public accountability arguments centered on access and affordability, back towards an emphasis on a "hope for cures." Here is how the San Francisco Business Times details the ad campaign: Debbie Reynolds went public on her incontinence for Pharmacia. Bob Dole talked…

Last week I noted the use of the "social progress" frame as articulated by Michael J. Fox in campaign commercials running this election season (go here and here.) Dems are not the first to employ this selective definition of science for promotional purposes, drug companies have been doing it for many years in direct-to-consumer advertising campaigns. Perhaps the most visible commercials right now are a series of testimonials run by Bristol Myers Squibb, with ads featuring Lance Armstrong and Lynn Redgrave.

It used to be that candidates posed with babies, and George W. Bush still does, especially when using photo-ops to frame instantly for the public that stem cell research is really about "research on young humans." To fight back, proponents of stem cell research are trading babies for white lab coats and instruments. Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle is just one of several Democrats across the country using their support for stem cell research to draw contrasts to their Republican opponent, in Doyle's case Congressman Mark Green. He's also the latest candidate to benefit from the endorsement of…

It's been a long and very busy week on campus, with several major articles in the works, and midterm grading in full swing. Yet I had to weigh in briefly on the relevance of framing to understanding the controversy this week over the Michael J. Fox stem cell ad. Press play above. Like many Americans, I grew up avidly following the (mis)adventures of Fox starring as Alex P. Keaton in Family Ties, Marty McFly in Back to the Future, and the title character in TeenWolf. (In fact, as a young teen I modeled myself after APK, though in my post-college political orientations I have evolved.) Fox…

The Bush administration isn't the only government opposing the expansion of publicly-funded ESC research. This week, Germany joined with Poland, Austria, Slovakia, Luxembourg, Malta and Slovenia in opposing a EU proposal to allow public funding for ESC research on embryos left over from in vitro clinics. Germany is trying to rally Italy to join in the EU coalition opposing stem cell research. The announcement features the multiple faces of German Chancellor Angela Merkel's government when it comes to science. Just a week earlier, Dr. Merkel, who holds a doctorate in physics, wrote in…

Below I provide an overview of the Editorials printed at the national and major regional newspapers. Without exception, the newspapers denounce Bush's decision. Most go with the "moral inconsistency" angle: why prevent research that could save lives when the left over embryos at IVF clinics would be destroyed anyway? Only a few papers emphasize PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY, linking Bush's decision to a general "hostility to science" and a perceived tendency to decide public policy based on his religious beliefs and the preferences of Christian conservative groups. A few reference the difference…

Over at Nanopublic, my colleague Dietram Scheufele, currently on holiday in Germany, follows-up on the German pharmaceutical campaign I highlighted on my old blog back in January. The ad campaign makes effective use of the SOCIAL PROGRESS frame to promote public belief in the value of research. In combination with the ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT frame, the SOCIAL PROGRESS interpretation is in many cases the dominant way scientists and industry define research in ways that promote public support, though sometimes the interpretation can backfire.