Framing exposes bad faith. A whole bunch of feelings-words shape and direct the fact-words, pushing them beyond their provable meaning. And then, when the supposed facts do show up, a bunch of them are obviously false.
ProPublica has just published a lazy hit piece on election integrity activist Cleta Mitchell, and any degree of media literacy would allow an alert reader to see through it. The phrase “conspiracy theories” puts in the usual work, making its first appearances in the third and sixth paragraphs. Mitchell is Captain Ahab, crazy and unbalanced: “ProPublica traced her obsession with politics and elections back to its roots.” 1.) She’s trying to keep noncitizens from voting. 2.) What are the psychological roots of her bizarre and obsessive behavior?
Election integrity? How did she become so insane?
Here’s a whole paragraph, and see if you can discern its narrative function:
Much of Mitchell’s influence derives from years of groundwork she’s done to put a foundation under the so-called election-integrity movement, once dismissed as a collection of oddballs and fringe actors.
It’s so subtle, right?
