The Vindicators' Blog

10 Reasons Why You MUST Frame Your Story First

FIRST IMPRESSIONS COUNT.  The way a reporter first hears a story tends to be how the story is eventually told.  Reporters pitch editors on stories based on the way they originally hear them.  Editors decide if stories are worth covering based on the way they are initially framed and expect reporters to write them in that frame.

YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO BE FRAMED AS A VILLAIN IN A NEWS STORY.  The news media tends to tell stories about Victims who were harmed, Villains who harmed them, and Vindicators who act on behalf of Victims.  Being defined as a Villain in a news story will affect how the audience views your brand.

GOOD VILLAINS = GOOD STORIES.  It is in the reporter’s best interest to tell a story with you as the Villain.  More people read and watch stories that have clear and compelling Villains because these stories are more interesting.  It’s in the reporter’s professional interest to use well-defined Villains to attract more readers/viewers.  You can either choose NOT to be a Villain by speaking first or run the risk the reporter will choose to make you one.

ONCE A VILLAIN, ALWAYS A VILLAIN.  If you are the Villain in the first story, you will be the Villain in follow-up stories.  The original framing of a story tends to be the framing for future stories.  These stories reinforce and validate one another.  If you can’t avoid follow-up stories, being the Villain in the initial story means more damage later.

INNOCENT PEOPLE HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE.  Your reluctance to talk will be seen as a sign you are a Villain with something to hide.  To reporters, silence implies guilt and innocent people have nothing to hide.  Appearing reluctant to talk to reporters is like waving a red flag in front of a bull – they charge harder and dig for more.

VILLAINS TEND TO BE CALL LAST BY REPORTERS, when the story is almost completely written.  Reporters don’t call so you can persuade them to tell a different story. They call for your reaction to the bad story they are about to tell.

FRAMES (ESPECIALLY BAD FRAMES) CAN’T BE TURNED OFF – THEY MUST BE REPLACED.  It is very difficult to change the framing of a story after it is told.  The media fights changing the first frame of a story because admitting they were wrong would expose them to risk and undermine their credibility.  If you are a Villain in the first story, expect to stay the Villain for as long as the story runs.

THE STORY’S FRAME WILL OUTLAST THE STORY’S FACTS.  People may not remember the story’s details in the long-term, but they will remember you were the Villain. 

IF YOU ARE EXPLAINING, YOU ARE LOSING.  And when you are reacting, you are forced to explain.  Reactions/explanations inevitably sound defensive, self-interested and self-justifying and are seen as additional evidence you are a Villain.

YOU SHOULDN’T BET A STORY WON’T RUN. If you care enough to worry about a story, someone else will care enough to tell it.  Staying silent and hoping the story doesn’t run vastly increases the odds the story becomes worse, longer, and more difficult to dismiss.

SO, INSTEAD OF WAITING TO BE FRAMED, FRAME FIRST.

Seven "Don'ts" of Framing

Keep these seven points in mind while using frames of reference:

• DON'T repeat or reinforce a negative frame.

• DON'T break your frame or inadvertently trigger a competing frame.

• DON'T try to speak in multiple frames.

• DON'T try to turn off a frame.

• DON'T over-complicate the frame - if the frame can't be reduced to a single sentence, it's likely two or more frames.

• DON'T confuse sides of an issue with sides of a frame.

• DON'T confuse frame and message.  The message is what is said; the frame is the filter through which the message is heard.

4 Reasons the Three Vs Matter

• Because the Three Vs is a frame for telling stories that the media already uses.

• Because the Three Vs communicate value judgments that are easily understood by your audiences.

• Because being framed by the media as a Villain in the Three Vs story is a very difficult place to find oneself.

• Because you can tell your story to the media in a positive Three Vs frame - one where you are not the Villain - and increase your chances that the media retells your story in the same frame.

Top 50 PR Stunts

 

 

I saw this post and thought it was cool enough to take a break from talking about the Three Vs to include a link to it.  Taylor Herring Public Relations in London compiled a list of Top 50 PR Stunts.

There are some really good ones on here.  Like Hands Across America, the Goodyear Blimp, the Blair Witch Project, Prince changing his name, and the Beatles rooftop concert.  But the list is Taylor Herring's and they include some of their own stunts, so it's a little biased.  And it has a definite Eurocentric bent.

The photo above is from Red Bull using a power winch to tow a wakeboarder across a flooded St. Mark's Square in Venice.  It's a cool photo, but I'm not sure it belongs. 

What PR stunts do you think are missing from the list and what should come off Taylor Herring's list?

Why This is the "Vindicators' Blog"

Now that I've blogged about the Three Vs, I can point out that the blog is named for the third V, the Vindicator who is trying to correct the harm done to the victims in the story.  I'm hoping that I can use this blog to outline tools that will help people become better Vindicators.

The Three Vs - Victim, Villain, and Vindicator

The Three Vs in the name stand for the three types of characters that tend to be described in the story: a VICTIM who was harmed, a VILLAIN who allegedly harmed the victim, and a VINDICATOR who is acting on behalf of the victim.

The central dramatic questions in every Three Vs story are: 

• Who was harmed, how, and by whom?
• What is to be done about it?

Unlike the Horserace Frame, stories told in the Three Vs frame connote strong value judgments that the audience easily understands.  Even if the media gives all sides “equal time,” by the time the story is completed the audience has a firm grasp on the nature of the “Victimization” that occurred and understands the side the reporter believes the audience should take. 

The structure of the story – and the assignment of the Victim, Villain and Vindicator roles – also communicates to the audience the values the reporter believes the audience should use in judging the story’s facts.

The Three Vs Frame is the basic structure the media uses when covering crime, conducting investigative stories, and advocating for consumers.  Stories about government and politics also use the Three Vs frame when the focus of the story is on harm rather than competition or control.

Once the media defines the Villain in a Three Vs story, it is very difficult to change.  Institutional momentum and inertia among the media, the fear of admitting a mistake, and the tendency to recast or ignore facts to fit the frame, all work against a person or group that has been defined as the Villain in a Three Vs story.

In investigative and consumer affairs stories, the media outlet places itself in the role of Vindicator on behalf of the story’s Victims.  Producing – and promoting – this type of story is one of the primary ways the media tries to prove its value to its audience. 

When the media assumes the role of Vindicator on behalf of a Victim and against a Villain, they trumpet every new piece of information they find that validates their point of view.

The How and Why of Horseraces

Stories are about their characters.  In a Horserace story by the news media, the characters in the story are competitors and the primary dramatic question about the characters is "Who wins and who loses?" 

These stories about winning and losing include: sports stories, finance stories, most campaign-related or legislation-related stories and stories about legal disputes.

The nature of the competition in a Horserace - what's at issue between or among the characters in the story - is covered, but is not really important to the story.  The competition could be over anything - a sporting event, a legal case, a political campaign - but what is really being covered is the back and forth of the competition. 

When the stakes or the nature of the competition are discussed, the issues are placed in the mouths of the competitors.  And, in the pursuit of being "balanced," all sides are usually given equal time to express themselves about the competition.

Since a Horserace story is boiled down to issues of competition, most of the values and judgments about it are leached out of the story.  The only values implied in a story using a Horserace frame are:

• Winning is better than losing.
• Winning is true/correct.
• The competition should be fair.

With only these values to guide them, there is nothing to direct the audience which side to pick in the competition, aside from the statements of the competitors.  And this creates one of the primary problems with a Horserace story.  If you aren't already interested in the competition - in other words, if you aren't already a fan of one of the competitors - there isn't much of in the story to catch your interest or draw you in. 

Like a sports story, an outside event, like a championship game, can help draw in a larger audience.  But without such an outside event, the audience for a Horserace story is, for the most part, made up of the fans of the competitors.  This is as true for political stories, whose fans are partisans and political junkies, as it is for sports.

How and Why the Media Frames Its Stories

Why the media frames its stories:

• The media doesn't report facts; it reports stories.  Facts are only reported as part off stories.
• The media has limited time and space to tell its stories, so it is forced to compress them.
• The media focuses and filters it stories by using frames of reference for its stories.

How the media frames its stories:

• The media uses two basic frames for most of its stories: the Horserace Frame, and the Three Vs Frame.

•  The Horserace Frame reduces the story to a competition.  The nature of the conflict between the characters in the story is not important; the story focuses on who is winning and who is losing.  This is the basic frame the media uses for sports stories, many business stories, legal stories, and most civic and political stories.
• The Three Vs Frame is about the three characters - or groups of characters - in the story.  The three characters are:  a VICTIM who was harmed, a VILLAIN who allegedly harmed the victim, and a VINDICATOR who is acting on behalf of the victim.  This is the basic frame the media uses for crime stories, investigative stories, consumer stories, most editorials, and some civic and political stories.

• The frames the media uses imply judgments about their stories and suggest values that should be used when evaluating their stories' subjects.  While most members of the media try to report with accuracy and balance the coverage of their subjects, the frames they choose for their stories connote huge amounts of unspoken or unwritten information.  For example, in a Three Vs story, the audience knows which character has been defined as the VILLAIN and understands which side they are expected to be on.

Over the next few posts, I'll spend some more time going into the Horserace and the Three Vs and how they are crucial to having your story understood and reported by the media in the way you intended.

4 Reasons Framing Communication Matters

Framing communication matters because:

1. Frames determine what we hear.
2. We hold in common many of the frames we use most.
3. If we can identify these common frames, we can use them to avoid miscommunication and communicate more effectively.
4. Our common frames shape our choices and by carefully selecting the frames we ue, we can influence the choices people make.

10 Principles for Framing Communication

1. Frames define facts, both explicitly and implicitly.
2. Everything is framed.  There are no unframed facts.
3. Frames Focus, Filter, and Fill-In.
4. Frames are plural.  There is always more than one possible frame of reference.
5. Frames are triggered by words, phrases, actions and images.
6. Frames are reinforced through their use and their negation.  Denying a frame reinforces it.
7. Frames can be replaced, but not turned off.  You can't leave a fact unframed.  You can only frame it differently.
8. The first frame counts because it will focus, filter and fill-in all subsequent facts.
9. Conflicting frames confuse and lead to miscommunication. 
10. Frames shape choices because they focus and filter and because they serve as judgmental short-cuts.