In a November 2009 editorial in In These TImes magazine, reflecting on the right’s success at re-framing the health care reform debate in its favor, Kevin O’Donnell writes, “When it comes to messaging, Republicans believe in science. Democrats don’t.” To their detriment, “Democrats cling to the idea, disproved by science and electoral experience, that if you present the facts, people will reason their way to the right conclusion.” Republicans, on the other hand, know to use “simple words, short sentences and a heavy dose of repetition.”
Must one be this cynical in order to win a campaign or a policy battle? Is the way to beat conservatives on important issues to “race to the bottom,” debasing rhetoric, and treating the public as imbeciles?
Fortunately, for those who wish for a more generous understanding of public discourse, Reinsborough and Canning provide another way of looking at “the battle of the narrative.” Like O’Donnell, any experienced activist knows that framing their issue (“how you say it”) matters to the success of their campaign to address the issue. Rather than “dumbing down” progressive campaign messaging, Reinsborough and Canning argue for a story-based strategy that deconstructs dominant narratives and constructs new ones that both challenge the audience’s assumptions as well as move that audience to action.
Reinsborough and Canning succeed at producing a user-friendly guide that brings social change theory from such heavyweights as Guy Debord and Antonio Gramsci to the service of community organizers and progressive movement-builders seeking to create messaging for their campaigns.
The book challenges readers to make praxis central to their work and encourages a disciplined consideration of their target and the broader systems that uphold it. In other words, change is “re:imagined” both by how it is achieved and what it is that can be changed. Just as physical direct action interrupts business-as-usual (a labor strike can literally shut down business), the authors succeed in showing how a campaign has a deeper impact when it also interrupts the the dominant narrative about the campaign issue. The authors introduce a series of concepts that become the building blocks “to win campaigns, build movements, and change the world.” The foundation beneath these building blocks is Gramsci’s notion of hegemony; that powerful interests exert control through dominant culture, such that the status-quo becomes “common sense.” If campaigns are to change the status-quo, the authors argue, they must be communicated in ways that fall outside of the narrative categories that the status-quo have created. The author’s example of Greenpeace’s Save the Whales campaign is instructive:
“Greenpeace campaigners asked themselves, what is the popular understanding of whaling, and where did it come from? They realized that people knew relatively little about whales, and that much of what they thought they knew came from a book that was commonly read in high schools: Herman Melville’s 19th-century novel Moby Dick. The vision of whaling presented in Moby Dick depicts heroic whalers taking to the sea in tiny boats and risking their lives to battle giant, evil whales. But by the 20th century, whaling was an industrial enterprise. Giant factory whaling ships dwarfed the endangered mammals, slaughtering them en masse in a manner that was neither heroic nor risky”.... (88-89).
When Greenpeace activists took action by literally placing themselves between whaling ships and the whales, it “showed it was the activists, not the whalers, who were the courageous people on small boats risking their lives--not to kill hales, but to save them. In this new narrative, whales were not big and evil; rather it was the giant whaling ships that were the dangerous monsters. The whales were the helpless victims and became sympathetic and worthy of protection....The story changed and the roles of hero, victim, and villain shifted” (89).
Going beyond the well-worn discussion of framing, the book utilizes the concept of the “meme,” or a unit of “self-replicating cultural information such as slogans (Just Do It!), iconic images that can be easily referenced (Abu Ghraib torture), catch phrases (“wardrobe malfunction”), symbols (the peace sign), or rituals (candles on a birthday cake) (33). Just as engines of dominant culture create memes, so can social change groups. Especially in the age of the Internet, campaigns can explode with the the clever design and viral distribution of a meme.
Reinsborough and Canning’s work is helpful for analyzing past campaigns and developing future ones. Formatted like a classic textbook, complete with numbered sections of chapters, boldfaced words and accompanying glossary, enlarged text windows, and encyclopedic-like images and captions, “Re:Imagining Change” is an ideal manual for the busy, practical activist.
Its resemblance to a textbook does not make it a stuffy or a chore to read. On the contrary, its inspiring examples of victory, revealing pull quotes, and fast pace situate the reader in a historical tradition of progressive organizing and link the reader’s activism to other contemporary efforts. Thanks in part to the book’s accessible language, anyone who is building a campaign or organizing the community can immediately apply the tools from the book to their work. Indeed, my favorite feature of the book is the “Reflections” box included during or at the end of chapters. An example:
“What are some assumptions in the dominant culture you think need to be changed? Make a list. You can cary this assumption list with you and keep a running tab of times when they show up, or when you surface new ones. Choose one assumption to work with for the moment....Are there institutions where it lives? Are there ways it is felt in popular culture? Now think about actions you could take to challenge that assumption and change the story. Are there physical points of intervention that could expose this assumption?”
Following the instructions in the “reflections” exercise I stepped back and considered a campaign that my organization, Arise Chicago, and other worker centers around the country are engaged in. The fight against the exploitation of low-wage earners is not new, but our “anti-wage theft campaign” is, precisely by the use of the meme, “wage theft.” Before, institutions like the Department of Labor and the mainstream media referred to the phenomena of worker exploitation as “non-payment of wages.”
However, several years ago, worker centers designed the “wage theft” meme. This meme overthrows the dominant assumption that wages are the property of the boss, to be shared with workers. Rather, in this new narrative, wages are the property of workers, that have been stolen by the boss. The wage theft meme is deeply effective, because a common defense narrative spun by an employer caught for not paying his workers is that these are hard economic times; that it is a difficult business climate; that everyone has to tighten their belts; that he’s doing everything he can to keep things running. The public is sympathetic to this defense. The employer is understood as benevolent; he is the job provider, the one who can save our economy--the workers, protesting, are ungrateful! Why, they should be thankful to be employed at all in this bad economy! The audience to this dominant narrative will identify with the employer, who is the one struggling to stay alive in this economy--just like us! The workers are troublemakers, trying to take wages away from the employer, a property-owner, just like you and me!
Alternatively, by using the wage theft meme, workers, not employers, become the victims of the bad economic climate. The boss, not the workers, becomes the unreasonable one. The self-respecting public will identify with the righteous worker, simply trying to stand up for their right to recover their private property. Using the wage theft meme, when my organization fights an employer who is not paying minimum wage, overtime wage, or wage at all, we also are fighting some of the assumptions embedded in the dominant narrative about labor. Accordingly, the media has begun to use the meme when they report on our campaigns, and proposed legislation has adopted “wage theft” into its title.
As the previous example shows, this book has inspired me to evaluate the choices we’re making in designing and communicating our organizing campaigns. Other progressive organizers might strive to do the same. The left is losing the twin battles of the narrative and in the field of many issue campaigns: climate change legislation (it kills jobs), public sector jobs (we have to cut back to decrease the deficit), gender parity (it will result in frivolous lawsuits), etc. Indeed, Sally Kohn of Movement Vision Lab writes that “Over the past year, much of the left has jealously ogled the Tea Party and its apparently up-out-of-nowhere grassroots movement energy.” Kohn locates the origin of this energy in the proliferation of “an attractive story of power and vision—a story in which everyday activists can see themselves and engage.”
That the left needs to develop strong, compelling, narratives, is clear. “Re:Imagining Change” is the resource that can show us how.