I was reading an article:
https://lifelessons.co/personal-develop ... ipulation/
and came across an interesting concept: frame control
FRAME CONTROL
Probably the single most powerful, and least understood, weapon of manipulation is frame control.
What is frame control?
Frame control is simply about making the other person fit into your reality and see things from your perspective.
In a job interview the frame of the employer might be:
“Let’s see if you’re good enough and have what it takes to work here”.
If you were the interviewee, you would want to switch that frame around to:
“Clearly you’re interested in me or you wouldn’t be wasting your time interviewing me. What are you going to say or do to convince me to come and work for you?”
Generally, the person who is most dominant, is the one who controls the frame, which is the unspoken meaning for the interaction.
When a child speaks with a parent, the parent controls the frame.
When a student speaks with a teacher, the teacher controls the frame.
When an employee speaks with the boss, the boss controls the frame.
In a friendship or a relationship, generally the one who cares less, or has the most perceived value, controls the frame.
What if two people of equal intelligence, power, and status meet? Generally the one with the more controlling or dominant personality will control the frame, as we saw when Steve Jobs met Bill Gates on stage in 2007, at the all things digital conference.
Let’s look at three perfect examples of frame control: Donald Trump, Steve Jobs and Tony Robbins.
Donald Trump is a master of frame control. He refuses to enter into anyone else’s reality, and he will do everything he can to make sure you enter into his reality and see things from his perspective, so he can lead you and control the interaction.
Steve Jobs was a master of frame control. He refused to enter into anyone else’s reality, and he really didn’t care what anyone thought, including his customers. He didn’t ask his customers what they wanted, he told them!
Tony Robbins is a master of frame control. Watch his videos on YouTube and see who controls the frame, him or his audience participants. He absolutely refuses to enter into anyone else’s reality and he will not let anyone lead or dominate the interaction for even a second.
Can you imagine Donald Trump, Steve Jobs, or Tony Robbins backing down from an argument, being submissive, or allowing themselves to be led or dominated by someone else? Can you even imagine them apologizing and saying “You’re right… I’m wrong”? Unlikely. As far as these guys are concerned they’re NEVER wrong.
Each of these men are master manipulators and perfect examples of frame control, and to be honest I respect the hell out of them for it.
In addition to these examples, you will find that the ultimate examples of frame control are generally celebrities, cult leaders, dictators, CEO’s, Kings, Presidents, religious and spiritual leaders, because they refuse to enter into anyone else’s reality, and they force everyone else to enter into theirs.
Now that you understand what frame control is, watch out for the following frames that manipulative people will often try to set on you:
They are the adult and you are the child
They are the ‘big brother’ and you are the ‘little brother’
They are the leader and you are the follower
They are the master and you are the student
They are ‘better’ than you, and you need to try to impress them
Their beliefs, opinions and perspective are more valid than yours
Their desires, goals and wishes are more important than yours
Their time is more valuable than yours
You owe them, and they’re somehow entitled to something from you
If you buy into ANY of these frames – you’ve already lost.
The bottom line is this: A manipulative person will always try to control the frame and force you to enter into their reality – no matter how fucked up and twisted it is. They will never allow themselves to enter into your reality, or to see things from your perspective, unless it is to gather some information which they can use against you.
If you want to manipulate someone, you must control the frame and make them buy into your reality.
But if you don’t want someone else to manipulate you, you cannot let them control the frame, and you must refuse to play their manipulative mind games.
Remember: He who controls the frame, controls the game.
frame control
Forum rules
Keep News and Politics about News and Politics.
Do not post full articles from other websites. Always link back to the source
Discuss things respectfully and take into account that each person has a different opinion.
Remember that this is a place for everyone to enjoy. Don’t try and run people off of the site. If you are upset with someone then utilize the foe feature.
Report when things come up.
Personal attacks are against guidelines however attacks need to be directed at a member on the forum for it to be against guidelines. Lying is not against guidelines, it’s hard for us to prove someone even did lie.
Once a topic is locked we consider the issue handled and no longer respond to new reports on the topic.
Keep News and Politics about News and Politics.
Do not post full articles from other websites. Always link back to the source
Discuss things respectfully and take into account that each person has a different opinion.
Remember that this is a place for everyone to enjoy. Don’t try and run people off of the site. If you are upset with someone then utilize the foe feature.
Report when things come up.
Personal attacks are against guidelines however attacks need to be directed at a member on the forum for it to be against guidelines. Lying is not against guidelines, it’s hard for us to prove someone even did lie.
Once a topic is locked we consider the issue handled and no longer respond to new reports on the topic.
-
Aletheia
- Regent
- Posts: 2249
- Joined: Mon May 21, 2018 8:44 pm
- Location: England
Doing a search for similar stuff found:
http://faculty.buffalostate.edu/smithrd/pr/framing.htm
Agenda-Setting
Source: Agenda-setting theory is associated with Maxwell McCombs & Donald Shaw (1972).
Premise: Media do not tell us what to think, but rather what to think about.
Evidence: Mass media have not been proven effective in determining how audiences will accept opinions and point of view in media reports. But mass media are effective in determining what audiences see as newsworthy. By the issues they cover, media can legitimize a story or marginalize either the entire story or certain aspects of it.
Example: In political campaigns, the media may not be effective in swaying public support toward or against a particular issue or candidate. But by continually raising particular questions and issues, or simply by showing an interest in a particular political candidate or issue, the media can lead the discussion toward or away from issues important to the candidate and even to the public (as identified through polls).
Questions for Discussion:
- In a given situation, how have media placed issues X, Y, & Z on their audiences' agenda?
- How can a public relations practitioner use to advantage an issue of relevance to the organization that is already on the media agenda?
- What can a public relations practitioner do to place an issue on the media agenda?
Priming
Source: Priming theory draws on politial science research of Shanto Iyengar, Mark Peters & Donald Kinder (1982).
Premise: Media provide a context for public discussion of an issue, setting the stage for audience understanding.
Evidence: The amount of time and space that media devote to an issue make an audience receptive and alert to particular themes. Likewise, audience perception of events are impacted by historical context with which they are familiar (through experience or through media).
Example: Media reporting may be very strong leading up to an event such as the Olympics, Super Bowl, or World Cup, making it almost impossible for audiences to ignore the event. Such aggressive reporting thus creates an audience of people at least temporarily interested in the sport, even though prior to the reporting many (perhaps most) members of the audience were not sports fans. Rather, they are people who get caught up in the moment.
Questions for Discussion:
- In a given situation, how have the media primed their audiences on a particular issue of importance to an organization?
- How can a public relations practitioner use to advantage an issue of relevance for which the organization finds that an audience has been favorably primed?
- What can a public relations practitioner do to gain the interest of media audiences when such priming has not occurred?
Framing
Source: Framing theory attributed to Erving Goffman (1974), drawing on work in economics.
Premise: Media provide a focus and environment for reporting a story, influencing how audiences will understand or evaluate it.
Evidence: Framing theory deals with social construction on two levels:
- Perception of a social phenomenon by journalists presenting news
- Interpretation of that phenomenon by audiences
Framing provides a rhetorical analysis of the text (an issue, or the reporting of the issue) to identify perception and/or interpretation. It involves the use of metaphor, spin, story telling, jargon, word choice, other narrative elements. Framing has been called an exercise in power (who tells the story first) and persuasion (manipulation of audiences).
Example: Through initial reporting, the media may present the facts of a story in such as way that the audience is given a particular point of view or frame of reference and interpretation. The media may report that a political candidate has extreme views on an issue, that a budget proposal is harmful to a particular group, that a new medicine is of questionable safety, and so on. By such reporting, the media thus have presented a frame through which the story is interpreted by audiences. It also sets the baseline for future reporting on the issue.
Questions for Discussion:
- In a given situation, how have the media framed a story?
- Is there "good guy and a "bad guy"?
- Whose version of facts gets top billing?
- Which version becomes the standard against other points of view inherent in the story?
- What is the "meaning" of the story?
- What can a public relations practitioner do to re-frame a story or counter a negative frame?
http://faculty.buffalostate.edu/smithrd/pr/framing.htm
Agenda-Setting
Source: Agenda-setting theory is associated with Maxwell McCombs & Donald Shaw (1972).
Premise: Media do not tell us what to think, but rather what to think about.
Evidence: Mass media have not been proven effective in determining how audiences will accept opinions and point of view in media reports. But mass media are effective in determining what audiences see as newsworthy. By the issues they cover, media can legitimize a story or marginalize either the entire story or certain aspects of it.
Example: In political campaigns, the media may not be effective in swaying public support toward or against a particular issue or candidate. But by continually raising particular questions and issues, or simply by showing an interest in a particular political candidate or issue, the media can lead the discussion toward or away from issues important to the candidate and even to the public (as identified through polls).
Questions for Discussion:
- In a given situation, how have media placed issues X, Y, & Z on their audiences' agenda?
- How can a public relations practitioner use to advantage an issue of relevance to the organization that is already on the media agenda?
- What can a public relations practitioner do to place an issue on the media agenda?
Priming
Source: Priming theory draws on politial science research of Shanto Iyengar, Mark Peters & Donald Kinder (1982).
Premise: Media provide a context for public discussion of an issue, setting the stage for audience understanding.
Evidence: The amount of time and space that media devote to an issue make an audience receptive and alert to particular themes. Likewise, audience perception of events are impacted by historical context with which they are familiar (through experience or through media).
Example: Media reporting may be very strong leading up to an event such as the Olympics, Super Bowl, or World Cup, making it almost impossible for audiences to ignore the event. Such aggressive reporting thus creates an audience of people at least temporarily interested in the sport, even though prior to the reporting many (perhaps most) members of the audience were not sports fans. Rather, they are people who get caught up in the moment.
Questions for Discussion:
- In a given situation, how have the media primed their audiences on a particular issue of importance to an organization?
- How can a public relations practitioner use to advantage an issue of relevance for which the organization finds that an audience has been favorably primed?
- What can a public relations practitioner do to gain the interest of media audiences when such priming has not occurred?
Framing
Source: Framing theory attributed to Erving Goffman (1974), drawing on work in economics.
Premise: Media provide a focus and environment for reporting a story, influencing how audiences will understand or evaluate it.
Evidence: Framing theory deals with social construction on two levels:
- Perception of a social phenomenon by journalists presenting news
- Interpretation of that phenomenon by audiences
Framing provides a rhetorical analysis of the text (an issue, or the reporting of the issue) to identify perception and/or interpretation. It involves the use of metaphor, spin, story telling, jargon, word choice, other narrative elements. Framing has been called an exercise in power (who tells the story first) and persuasion (manipulation of audiences).
Example: Through initial reporting, the media may present the facts of a story in such as way that the audience is given a particular point of view or frame of reference and interpretation. The media may report that a political candidate has extreme views on an issue, that a budget proposal is harmful to a particular group, that a new medicine is of questionable safety, and so on. By such reporting, the media thus have presented a frame through which the story is interpreted by audiences. It also sets the baseline for future reporting on the issue.
Questions for Discussion:
- In a given situation, how have the media framed a story?
- Is there "good guy and a "bad guy"?
- Whose version of facts gets top billing?
- Which version becomes the standard against other points of view inherent in the story?
- What is the "meaning" of the story?
- What can a public relations practitioner do to re-frame a story or counter a negative frame?
Donate to MomConfessions to avoid seeing ads just select donate from the header menu. Please visit our friends:
