Frame Analysis Ideology

Frame analysis faces unresolved problems and tensions in at least five central areas: the conceptualization of ideology, identifying the manifestation of the frame, the distinctions between discourse and material resources, the micro-macro linkages in the framing process, and the difficulties of maintaining frame fidelity and alignment.

Defining the ideology and its relationship to the framing:

Framing theorists have united over the definitions of the framing and ideological process, but the differences or relation between the two concepts are still left unclear. Benford, Snow and their respective colleagues had long researched to define the relationship between the two but unfortunately ended up with vague conclusions. They suggested that

Often such work portrays a particular configuration of statements, symbols, and meanings as an example of underlying and enduring collective understandings produced in extended ideological struggles. The epistemological assumptions behind such representations are that the rationality of the elements establishing the frame map to some corresponding consistency in a belief system. This is seen as particularly important for purposes of frame alignment. However, the presupposition is that this framing discourse is an internally stable enough tool for the communication of meaning so that interpretive strategies for mobilization and action are possible. In many of their analyses, frame analysts also assume some isomorphism between their abstractions and the ways in which people actually use framing

Frame analysts usefully state a variety of institutional and speculative limitations that regulate the effective life of a frame, including media progressions, series of protest, state interference, high-class hegemonic operations, and internal social controls underlining the consistency on social movement actors. Given the primary strategic and practical conception of framing used by frame analysts, problems of constancy and duration are largely processes that is beyond the production of meaning within framing itself. If activists and social movement organizations effectively do the strategic ideological work of lining up the frames to popular conceptions of politics and social issues, then frames will reverberate with their target populations. However, left undiscussed are the dynamic uncertainties in the very process of discourse that mitigate against combined action, frames immovability and the