Lesson Report:
Title: Media, Emotion, and Framing: Launching Phase 3 (Causation) through Headline Analysis
Synopsis: This session launched the course’s third phase (causation) by examining how media does more than deliver information—it frames events to make audiences feel and believe particular things. Students defined “media,� analyzed how specific words/images evoke emotion, distinguished objective vs. subjective statements, and practiced identifying and rewriting headline framings to see how the same facts can be told as different stories.
Attendance
– Absent (4): Idana, Ijan, Ali, Stravka
– Notes: Alenbek briefly stepped out; Almina has withdrawn from the course.
Topics Covered (chronological, with activity names and key content)
1) Opening and Midterm Debrief
– Instructor congratulated students on midterm performance; roughly half graded so far, overall solid quality.
– Emphasized the core objective met by most: using course frameworks (not personal opinion) to explain events.
– Timeline: Aim to return grades next week with a numeric score plus short written feedback; offered to provide more detailed feedback via email upon request.
2) Transition to Phase 3: Causation Focus
– Framed the next 4 weeks: shifting from new analytical frameworks to causation—how X leads to Y.
– Today’s entry point: media and politics as a domain to study causal influence via framing (how presentation causes audience beliefs/emotions).
3) Defining “Media�: Functions and Scope (guided discussion)
– Elicited examples: news (websites, TV, newspapers), social media.
– Working definition established: media as a delivery mechanism (a medium) that transmits information from producers (writers, broadcasters, posters) to audiences.
– Crucial add-on: media does more than inform; it persuades and shapes beliefs, often unintentionally. It suggests what to think about events, not just what happened.
– Identified purposes: inform, persuade, sometimes control; acknowledged media’s inherent power/authority.
4) Individual Reflection: Emotionally Salient Media (2–3 minutes)
– Prompt: Identify a recent piece of media (any format/language) that evoked a strong emotion (anger, shame, sadness, joy, wonder, disgust). Note the topic and the emotion.
– Deeper prompt: Specify the exact words, ideas, or images that triggered the emotion (e.g., not “car crashes are bad,â€� but the particular phrasing or imagery that provoked anger).
5) Form Pairs/Small Groups and Pattern-Finding Activity
– Students paired up (temporary triads/quad as needed while a partner stepped out).
– Task: Share chosen media and identify patterns in how authors induced emotion—lexical choices, imagery, narrative structure, and recurring persuasive tactics.
– Notes on pairing logistics: Ekaterina temporarily joined Idarbek’s group until partner return; Dastan/Daniyar paired as needed.
6) Whole-Class Share: Examples and What Triggered Emotion
– National currency “new billsâ€� story: Pride evoked by future-oriented language (progress, independence, self-reliance) and nation-forward imagery; speculation about a “brighter futureâ€� used as affective lever.
– “NASA/approaching spacecraftâ€� post: Mystery and uncertainty framed to produce awe/unease; author leveraged speculative future to create emotional engagement.
– Child killed in traffic incident: Words like “innocentâ€� carried high moral weight, channeling anger, grief, and injustice; contrast of “manslaughter vs. murderâ€� shaped audience blame assignment.
– Town renaming debate: The word “changeâ€� and photos of new signage triggered mixed pride/unease; polarized comment sections revealed contested community identity and nostalgia vs. progress frames.
– “Misinformation and jargonâ€� theme: Posts leveraging expert-sounding terms and professional slang lent undue credibility; intentionality discussed (emotion can be engineered or accidental).
– Cancel-culture/abuse accusations case: Terms like “pedophileâ€� identified as morally supercharged; discussion of false accusations (composer suicide example) highlighted catastrophic consequences when framing outruns facts.
– Uyghur struggle documentary: Interviews and separation-from-family imagery invoked sadness/anger via vivid personal narratives of injustice.
– Mexican case of two boys killing abusive stepfather: Headline “boys found not guiltyâ€� elicited a justice/sympathy frame; noted how identical facts could be headlined oppositely to invert moral reading.
7) Mini-Lecture: Objective vs. Subjective and the Concept of Framing
– Objective = fact (e.g., “the marker is redâ€�); Subjective = opinion/value judgment (e.g., “the marker is bad/beautifulâ€�).
– Ideal of objective news acknowledged, but absolute objectivity is not feasible; human biases infuse choices of words, images, and emphasis.
– Defined framing: the selection and emphasis of certain aspects of reality to guide audience interpretation and emotion—storytelling that persuades what to think about facts.
8) Pair Analysis of Two Headlines (same event, different frames)
– Headline A: “Hundreds of students gather to demand action on university budget cuts.â€�
– Suggested “good guysâ€�: students; “bad guysâ€�: university administrators/budget decision-makers.
– Lexical cues: “hundredsâ€� (legitimacy/scale), “gatherâ€� (order/solidarity), “demand actionâ€� (justice/urgency; implies a wrong needing redress), “budget cutsâ€� (harm to students/services).
– Headline B: “Student protests disrupt campus life for third straight day.â€�
– Suggested “bad guysâ€�: students; implied “good guysâ€�: general campus community seeking normalcy.
– Lexical cues: “disruptâ€� (negative intrusion), “campus lifeâ€� (victim of disruption), “third straight dayâ€� (persistence/annoyance; escalates perceived harm).
– Takeaway: Both headlines report the same facts but assign moral roles and emotional tone via word choice and focus. Readers should identify intended persuasion before inferring the facts.
9) Final Activity: Headline Reframing and Submission
– Task (in pairs): Find three headlines (any language) that evoke emotion; for at least one, identify the frame (what the author wants you to believe and why—cite exact words).
– Reframe: Rewrite the headline to push an opposite interpretation while describing the same event (e.g., “Judge finds boys not guiltyâ€� vs. “Murderers set free by judgeâ€�).
– Deliverable: Send the original and reframed headlines to the class Telegram group before leaving.
Actionable Items
Urgent (by next class)
– Verify Telegram submissions: Ensure all pairs sent both original and reframed headlines; follow up with any missing groups.
– Communicate to absentees (Idana, Ijan, Ali, Stravka): Share today’s instructions and require the headline reframing task as a make-up submission.
– Plan next session: Prepare a curated set of paired headlines (local and international) to deepen practice in spotting framing and tracing causal claims.
High priority (this week)
– Midterm grading: Return numeric grades with brief individualized feedback by next week as promised.
– Feedback channel: Remind students to email if they want deeper comments or clarification on areas for improvement (especially for the final).
– Roster maintenance: Update records to reflect that Almina has withdrawn; confirm spelling/status for Alenbek (temporarily stepped out) and monitor any recurring attendance issues.
Nice to have
– Resource scaffold: Create a quick reference sheet of emotionally charged terms and common framing moves (e.g., disrupt vs. gather; neutral vs. moralized nouns/adjectives).
– Extension activity: Provide optional practice set where students extract “objective coreâ€� from a framed paragraph, then rewrite it in two opposing frames.
Homework Instructions:
NO HOMEWORK
The only task was an in-class activity to “send your original article headline and the reframed headline to our Telegram group chat before you go today… Once you’re finished you can go… you guys are free to go if you’re done,� indicating it was to be completed before leaving class, not as homework.