According to a new study led by the University of Michigan, framing present-day societal issues as attacks on civil rights decreases overall public support for government action.
In partnership with scholars from the University of British Columbia in Canada and the University of California, Berkeley, the study authors conducted two surveys with roughly 7,500 registered voters in California regarding their feelings about civil rights. Overall, the majority of respondents supported civil rights in the abstract, believing that problems such as discrimination and material deprivation are violations of American values. However, the term “civil rights” invoked negative feelings for most participants across various demographic backgrounds, including political affiliation and race.
The participants were presented with three civil rights claims in three formats: one grounded in American ideals of equal rights, another as an appeal to the idealized memory of the civil rights movement, and a third as a racialized message likely to provoke backlash. According to the results, civil rights framing was counterproductive across issues, beneficiaries, and audiences. For example, civil rights framing even reduced Black respondents’ support for government action to address hardships faced by Black communities.
The authors theorize the widespread backlash of civil rights framing may be a result of evoked comparisons to the historic civil rights movement of the 1960s. This comparison to a period of state-sanctioned discrimination may undermine contemporary hardships as less significant, potentially deterring public support. Based on their findings, the authors believe discussions on modern social justice issues should use language centered on “American values,” a framing that resonated with the broader American population.
