Framing, in accordance to the U.S government, is the open structure that gives shape and support to the political issues America faces. In the article “The Framing of Immigration”, written by George Lakoff and Sam Ferguson, they also imply that framing, in the context of immigration, has various different components in which the solution to the “immigration problem” cannot be solved without considering each component. For instance, Lakoff and Ferguson use the example of the Illegal Frame, where the word “illegal”, in their opinion, is being misused. The solution to the Illegal frame would work for this frame alone. When considering another frame, such as the security frame, the solution would no longer be of any use. The concept of using a
…show more content…
At first, the article discusses the different crises: Humanitarian, civil rights, and cheap labor (Lakoff and Ferguson 20). The connection between the “immigration problem” and the crisis’s is that someone can look at the “immigration problem” and see it as any one of the crises. Lakoff and Ferguson point out that the solutions of the individual crisis will not alone solve the entire “immigration problem” as a whole (21). The concept of solving a part of the problem, and not the entire situation as a whole, is connected to framing. Lakoff and Ferguson list out the different frames they have conceptualized relevant to the “immigration problem.” Reading each frame individually the reader can sense the separation and the solutions of each frame have with one another. Also, the examples used in each of the frames are targeted towards an opinionative stance on the subject, which the authors use to further explain their main claim. For instance, the frame of security explains that wanting security comes from the feeling of being in danger (Lakoff and Ferguson 23). Lakoff and Ferguson use this opinion to show the unique view that frame has on its own. Each frame is also separated by their title being italicized implying that each frame’s solution stands in a different position than the others. The majority of the article is spent explaining the reasons for the main claim, which provides a good cause for the authors warrant: The framing itself makes the “immigration problem” have many solutions rather than just
At first, the article discusses the different crises: Humanitarian, civil rights, and cheap labor (Lakoff and Ferguson 20). The connection between the “immigration problem” and the crisis’s is that someone can look at the “immigration problem” and see it as any one of the crises. Lakoff and Ferguson point out that the solutions of the individual crisis will not alone solve the entire “immigration problem” as a whole (21). The concept of solving a part of the problem, and not the entire situation as a whole, is connected to framing. Lakoff and Ferguson list out the different frames they have conceptualized relevant to the “immigration problem.” Reading each frame individually the reader can sense the separation and the solutions of each frame have with one another. Also, the examples used in each of the frames are targeted towards an opinionative stance on the subject, which the authors use to further explain their main claim. For instance, the frame of security explains that wanting security comes from the feeling of being in danger (Lakoff and Ferguson 23). Lakoff and Ferguson use this opinion to show the unique view that frame has on its own. Each frame is also separated by their title being italicized implying that each frame’s solution stands in a different position than the others. The majority of the article is spent explaining the reasons for the main claim, which provides a good cause for the authors warrant: The framing itself makes the “immigration problem” have many solutions rather than just