Abstract

This essay analyzes the rhetorical framing tactics of a group of disability activists to understand how they use key words, topic shifts, and other framing maneuvers to amplify marginalized voices in public debates. Focusing on a town hall meeting and a legislator update meeting between activists and lawmakers, the author uses stasis theory to analyze how these maneuvers (1) create gateways for marginalized voices to enter the discussion and (2) anchor deliberations around topics of importance to the disabled community. This suggests a more complex role for framing in face-to-face deliberative contexts than studies of framing strategies in written texts have traditionally considered. I argue that a multidimensional view of framing uniting consideration of word choice with attention to interactive dynamics is necessary to appreciate how framing maneuvers can not only shape the content of debates but amplify the voices of people excluded by the tacit rules of democratic deliberation.

Journal
Written Communication
Published
2024-07-01
DOI
10.1177/07410883241242109
Open Access
Closed
Topics

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (0)

No articles in this index cite this work.

Cites in this index (1)

  1. College English
Also cites 16 works outside this index ↓
  1. 10.1515/text.2010.030
  2. 10.1080/13613324.2012.730511
  3. 10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.611
  4. 10.26818/9780814213612
  5. 10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x
  6. 10.1057/9781137001184
  7. 10.5749/j.ctvpj7hwc
  8. 10.5749/minnesota/9780816682973.001.0001
  9. 10.4324/9780203864463
  10. 10.1080/00335630.2020.1785637
  11. 10.1515/ling.1979.17.5-6.365
  12. 10.1002/9780470773970
  13. 10.1515/9783110806632.1
  14. 10.1080/17524032.2013.816329
  15. 10.1002/9780470977934
  16. 10.1215/9780822372189
CrossRef global citation count: 0 View in citation network →