The importance of framing evidence and sources

Framing evidence and sources is important because it is a way that the author essentially guides the readers by showing them specific evidence in the text. The textbook, “Writing Arguments a Rhetoric with Readings” says: “…an arguer consciously selects evidence from a wide field of data and then frames these data through rhetorical strategies that emphasize some data, minimize others, and guide the reader’s response.”

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has various data regarding plastic waste, and how the oceanic ecosystem is affected. The EPA does a great job with framing evidence, facts, and sources that show the reader how much plastic waste has negatively affected the ocean. One of the first sections in their article on plastic waste incorporates facts that make their readers sympathetic to the EPA’s goal(s) that they are trying to accomplish. Then the EPA shows the reader how plastics are made, and how they are recycled. After that basic information, the article explains to the reader how to identify different plastics, and how those specific plastics should be recycled. Finally, they show markets for recovered plastics; which is how those plastics are converted into another usable product rather than just add to the accumulating waste.

When I did a Google search for framing sociology, I found one website that was helpful in understanding framing theory. It said: “Framing theory and the concept of framing bias suggests that how something is presented (the “frame”) influences the choices people make. This idea is important because it is contrary to the central concept of rational choice theory.  According to this theory, people always strive to make the most rational choices possible.” In other words, framing evidence should be done in a way that the readers will identify with statistics and evidence that is rational. So, a hypothetical example would be:

1.     This year, .06% of children will die by poisoning due to packaging labels not being explicit.

2.     This year, 2,506 children will die by poisoning due to packaging labels not being explicit.

If I were arguing for better labeling of hazardous materials, I would choose to use the actual number, rather than percent of child deaths, because it appears to be more to the reader. If I chose to use the percent of children, rather than the number, it wouldn’t convey the same message; that mislabeling is a big issue, and needs to be reformed. These types of examples can go either way, but the important part is that the author chooses to display the facts or data in a way that is more powerful to the reader. Framing is an important and imperative way to be effective in any argumentative writing.