Vinny Sidoli

Framing

1. One of the frame’s that Nike’s opponents established was a negative identity frame. The other two types of frames would include a collective action injustice frame and also a negative consequence frame. These frames were put together by people from Labor Unions who wanted to see some manufacturing return to the United States and also Labor Activists who saw the practices as being barbaric.

Nike countered by using frames to disseminate the emotional outrage of the issues involving the labor laws. They took the offensive and framed out the positive things that the company performs along with the dedication they have for enforcing and respecting the labor laws.

The sweatshop framing was seen as a direct style where the human rights was an indirect action. The woman were underpaid and around dangerous equipment. Nike pushed out that they support the empowerment of women everywhere due to their dynamic style. They said that this was aimed at underdeveloped countries and poverty stricken areas. The low wages were seen as a good thing because they could get more women work and take them out of poverty.

An implication that can be drawn is that they are in accordance with the international laws. The fact that they are still in China and employing woman without being shut down can be tricky to understand because of their framing. If it is seen that the company is running with all the framing the put out it would appear that they turned things around for the better by improving pay and working conditions. This can be misleading because the implication could be that the did not improve these things for the better of the worker but just to do the bare minimum to not be in trouble with the law.