Millions recently gathered in protest against President Donald Trump, highlighting his administration's policies affecting immigrants, LGBTQ individuals, and other vulnerable groups. However, a new study published in the American Sociological Review suggests that framing these issues as civil rights violations may be counterproductive.

Kim Voss, a sociology professor at UC Berkeley and co-author of the study, explained that while people generally have positive views on civil rights, linking contemporary problems like discrimination or poverty to civil rights can reduce public support for government intervention. "Even more surprising to us was how widespread this negative effect was," said Voss.

The study involved surveying approximately 7,500 California voters in 2016 and 2019. Researchers tested the impact of civil rights framing by presenting participants with vignettes about hardships framed as civil rights violations or otherwise. Participants were then asked about their support for government action.

Voss noted that they expected civil rights framing to boost support for addressing discrimination but found it ineffective across various issues and demographics. "We term this effect 'frame backfire' because civil rights framing was counterproductive across issues," she stated.

The research highlights how an idealized memory of the Civil Rights Movement might diminish the perceived significance of today's social issues. Voss emphasized that movements adopting civil rights rhetoric may not achieve the desired impact due to these perceptions.

The findings suggest activists need a new "master frame" to garner public support for inclusive policies. Voss mentioned that appeals based on American values resonated more with respondents than those based on civil rights.

At recent protests like the "No Kings" demonstration in New Jersey, participants displayed signs invoking American values as part of their message. This approach may offer a path forward for building effective movements against authoritarianism and inequality in the U.S.

###