Values highlight what is important to people. By tapping into common commitments and priorities, values make people think about why an issue matters. We can infuse values into a message when we “frame” it. Framing refers to a way that we introduce a problem or a solution. It is a powerful method of changing public opinion either for or against to a certain policy.

Think about this value-based frame:

“Children should be protected from alcohol harms.”

Another value-based message is this:

“People have a right to know about alcohol risks.”

Another one:

“People have a right to know that alcohol causes cancer.”

No one can oppose above value-based sentences.

We can use this message to persuade the community and decision makers to pass legislation on alcohol labelling on the connection between alcohol and cancer risk. Recently, Nason Maani, a lecturer in Inequalities and Global Health Policy pointed that there is a large gap between this evidence and public awareness of alcohol risk. He further agues that alcohol labelling that highlight this risk will help to bridge this knowledge gap to some extent.

Use values that resonate with the most people

Experts recommend choosing values that resonate with everyone for value-based framing. Above value and rights-based sentences appeal to almost all.

There is another advantage of shifting public focus to such value-based frames. We distract the public focus from focusing on individual values and hence victim blaming. Instead, we create room to discuss much wider social and structural determinants and ultimately clearing the path for systems change.

Search for values that most people value

To use values for message framing, we need to know what values people value. And, we also need to find out the common grounds between us and them.

This 2017 FrameWorks Institute study describes how they found a common ground and values that Manitobans value about Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD).

Identify the dominant cultural models

Cultural models refer to models that describe shared but implicit
understandings, assumptions, and patterns of reasoning that informs to public thinking about something. These models help us understand how people interpret their problems and solutions available at hand. Better understanding of dominant cultural models help us frame our messages persuasively.

The 2017 FrameWorks study of the FASD is a good example of how such cultural models can be used in message framing. The report discusses several types of Foundational cultural models in their study of women, pregnancy, and FASD in Manitoba.

• Individualism model: According to this model, People think that the problem occurs as a result of poor individual choices and lack of willpower. As per this study, people think the FASD as a result of poor choice of drinking alcohol while being pregnant. This leads to victim blaming and stigmatization.
  • Gatekeeper model: The interviewees thought pregnant women as the sole gatekeeper to their babies’ wellbeing. The study authors call it as the “gatekeeper” model. We can consider the model as a type of individualism.
    • The pregnant women as a vessel: The authors also reported here a metaphor that interviewees used – pregnant women as vessels or incubators for the babies.
  • Rational Actor model: This is another variant of individualism model – that having a baby with FASD is a direct outcome of making a “rational decision” of drinking alcohol in pregnancy.

We can find many deep-seated implicit cultural models related to the

Look for common grounds

This 2017 FrameWorks Institute study outlined common grounds that both the public and experts align with each other. Following is a summary of those elements;

Both agree that,

• FASD is an important issue.
• FASD is a largely “invisible disability”.
• Alcohol affects fetal development.
• Women consume alcohol for the same reasons that non-pregnant women consume including mental health problems and stress.
• Addiction affects women’s ability to control alcohol use in pregnancy.
• Agree that social services should be available.
• Consider education is useful for prevention FASD.

Look for gaps

The above study then explored gaps in the understandings between the experts and the public.

• About the causation: While the experts recognize the important role of social determinants of FASD, the public’s dominant cultural model is the individualism – personal responsibility.

The report cites several other gaps of understandings between experts and the public. You can read it.

Frame the messages to address those gaps

The dominant cultural model is the individualism, which leads to victim blaming. The study authors suggest three frames to re-direct the public focus from victim blaming to collective responsibility.

These frames help us not only for this FASD problem, but in most of other situations as well. Therefore, it is worthwhile to explore those frames.