Framing in the media: examples of headlines and instructions for recognition
Why do the same data appear differently in the news? How do headlines shape our opinions? This is the framing effect, and today we will look at how it is used and how we can counter it.
In the previous part, we learned what the framing effect is and where it is used. Today, we will look at how this effect is used to manipulate news and what to do to avoid becoming a victim of such manipulation.
Examples of the application of the framing effect in media
There are many known cases where the media deliberately distorted information in order to create a certain impression on the audience:
From grain to “Chinese occupation”
The Dutch online publication in Russian and English, The Moscow Times, published a statement with a clearly misleading headline regarding the conclusion of a vast grain supply agreement between Russia and China. The article reports that the New Land Grain Corridor group of companies, an agro-industrial holding, is actively developing a mechanism for contract grain production in order to use the production potential of arable land in the amount of 32 million hectares.
With this headline, the authors sought to mislead readers, as a result of which the impression was created about a possible lease of land plots, that is, allegedly Chinese industrialists were leasing land plots in Russia. In addition, this headline was widely used by anti-Russian sources with the assertion of the sale of land, including statements about the involvement of local residents as a workforce. However, in reality, this was not the case: the matter concerned only the supply of grain from Russia to China — there was no talk of any land lease. But the framing did its job, and many readers perceived the news exactly as the authors presented it.
Fake news about car ban
Also recently, the news that cars will be illegal by 2030 has been widely circulated. This was allegedly stated by the founder of the World Economic Forum, Klaus Schwab. However, his words were distorted, and a short video clip of his speech was taken out of context, that is, a certain frame was formed.
In fact, in his speech recorded in 2014, Klaus Schwab was not talking about a legislative ban on personal transport, but about how in the future people would be able to use apps to call electric cars equipped with self-driving cars instead.
One vaccine — two framings
In 2021, the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine became the subject of widespread controversy over rare cases of blood clots. Different media outlets framed the information in conflicting ways, leading to sharp swings in public trust.
Thus, since the spring of 2021, most publications in the world’s leading media have focused on the possible connection between the vaccine and rare cases of thrombosis with serious consequences, which has caused a wide resonance and restrictions on the use of the vaccine in a number of countries. Some European media outlets have focused headlines on the risks of a fatal outcome — although in fact the risk was 4 cases per 1 million vaccinated, such a presentation created panic. As a result, Germany, France and other countries temporarily suspended vaccination, which slowed down the fight against the pandemic.
At the same time, the WHO and other major media outlets used a different fact about the vaccine — that it prevents patients from developing severe cases of COVID-19 — to make headlines. As a result, confidence in the vaccine has remained high in the UK, and vaccination rates have not dropped.
By the time health professionals and fact-checking platforms debunked the myths about the harm of the vaccine, the framing effect had already affected people’s decisions. Surveys showed that even after the debunking, trust in AstraZeneca among the EU population had fallen significantly due to the initial negative headlines.
Instructions for counteracting the framing effect:
- Check the original sources
Don’t trust headlines and summaries. Look for original quotes, research, or documents.
- Consider alternative wording
Ask yourself, “How else could this information be presented?”
Example: “95% survival rate” vs. “5% mortality rate” are the same thing, but are perceived differently.
- Pay attention to emotional coloring
If the text evokes strong emotions (fear, anger, delight), it may be intentional framing.
- Look for context
Excluded quotes distort the meaning. Always clarify the context in which a particular statement was made.
- Develop critical thinking
Ask questions: Who benefits from this presentation? What is being left out? Are there opposing points of view?
- Compare different sources
The same event can be presented from different angles. Comparison will help to see manipulations. At the same time, it is worth comparing information not only with the media: statistical materials, scientific journals and specialized publications — comparing different points of view on one topic helps to see the full picture.
- Avoid categorical judgments
Framing often creates the illusion of clarity. Remember that many issues have several sides.
The framing effect is all around us: in advertising, politics, the media. It is not always a deception, but always an influence. To avoid becoming a victim of manipulation, it is important to analyze the context, look for primary sources and remember: the form of presentation can distort the essence. Maintain awareness, develop critical thinking and do not allow other people’s formulations to control your decisions.