An imperious, closed sandbox? A rejoinder to Van Dijk's critique of the framing perspective on social movement mobilization. (April 2023)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Snow, David A; Vliegenthart, Rens
• Is Part Of: Discourse studies. Volume 25:Number 2(2023)
• Page Start: 297
• Page End: 308
• Publication Date: 2023-04
• Subjects: Communication -- discourse -- framing -- mobilization -- social movements; Discourse analysis -- Periodicals; 401.405
• DOI: 10.1177/14614456231155079
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1461-4456

Abstract

In this article, we provide a response to Teun van Dijk's criticism of the framing perspective on social movements, as expressed in his article 'Analyzing Frame Analysis. A Critical Review of Framing Studies in Social Movement Research'. We argue that a more constructive tone is warranted and explain how his criticism is largely based on a selective reading and misinterpretation of the vast literature on framing and social movements. We provide a more detailed explanation of how discourse and related concepts such as schema and ideology are discussed by social movement scholars and critically reflect on his claim that framing as a concept can rather be replaced by discourse and/or various other cognitive/psychological constructs. Finally, we suggest how a discourse perspective and insights from social movement framing can be complementary in increasing our understanding of how movements (and other actors) communicate and with what consequences.