The Language of Politics

Over at Talking Points Memo, Josh Marshall is, once more, tracking the Republican use of language on an issue. He spent quite of bit of time a while back looking at how Republicans discovered that "privatization" of Social Security was not selling well with the American public, so they switched from talking about "private accounts" to "personal accounts" (and blaming the former terminology on the Democrats). Marshall had entry after entry detailing the shift in media reports as they followed the Republican Party line about labels for the same old sow's ear.

Now Marshall is tracking the use of the term "nuclear option" as it refers to a change in Senate rules on the use of the filibuster. The term was coined by Trent Lott, used widely by Republicans, quoted by Democrats and the media. Then, Republicans discovered that it wasn't selling well with the American public, so they are trying to change the label for the rule change to "constitutional option" (and blaming the former terminology on the Democrats).

Marshall's efforts are more about media actions and than how successful the strategy of changing labels works. There is something revealed in the process he apparently believes (and so do I) that tells us about the degree to which the corporate media are lazy, duped by party press releases and repetition, and/or corrupted by association with power.

The interesting thing about both of these label shifts is how blatant they are. The shifts are easily documented and clearly reflective of deliberate strategy. There's nothing subtle about it.

Even more interesting, however, is the failure of both linguistic campaigns to move public opinion on the issues. The public still doesn't like the proposed changes to Social Security. They still don't like the changes to Senate rules. And it's not like the public fully understands either issue. It more like the choice of label or frame really does set things up in people's minds; you can call it by another name, but the first one has already determined attitudes.