1. Claims-Making Introduction Based on social constructionist school of thought (Spector & Kitsuse) No value judgement on the legitimacy of the assertion is implied by the word “claim”. Who are the Claims-Makers? those who assert that a social problem exists and needs amelioration by persons in authority. are sometimes moral entrepreneurs (crusaders), sometimes victims, sometimes professional associations. distinction between conscience constituents and interest group (beneficiaries).

2. Claims-Making (cont’d) What is a ‘Claim’? A morally-legitimated demand that a right be recognized or implemented or created, or a putative condition be altered or eliminated OR An attempt to persuasively define a situation in a particular way and to have that definition become widely accepted (normative) as a basis for ameliorative action. i.e., an attempt to construct and impose a meaning

3. Claims-Making (cont’d) Forms Taken by Claims-Making Possible Responses to Claims- Making by Authorities Claims are couched in a vocabulary (discourse) of discomfort Seeks to resonate with values. Values are a resource. Forums for Claims-Making Solicitation of Claims by Agencies and Shaping of Claims to Mandate of the Agency Interactive Nature of Claims-Making (e.g., in video Power: 1 River, 2 Nations)

4. Claims-making (cont’d): Frame Alignment (FNC, p. 207-8) What is a ‘Frame’? An interpretive scheme – a set of categories through which we perceive and give meaning to the world. It organizes experience and provides guides for action. What is Frame Alignment? The process whereby the discourse used by claims- makers links the claims-makers’ interpretive orientations (frames) to the interpretive orientations of the recipients of the claims making message.

5. Claims-Making: Frame Alignment (cont’d) and Condensation Symbols Types of Frame Alignment Processes e.g., value amplification (idealizing a basic), belief amplification (e.g., buttressing stereotypes), frame transformation Condensation Symbols (FNC, p. 143) - are symbols which allow for a multiplicity of definitions (interpretations), tend to induce emotional responses and provoke value judgements, and by their imprecision give the appearance of commonality while masking significant differences in interpretation among various users.