Thread by @Delafina777

Somehow got signed up for some sort of conservative email blast. It was horrific, but what struck me is liberal email blasts are mostly about bad things happening to other people, while conservative ones are mostly about bad things that could or supposedly are happening to you.

Like the liberal email blasts I get are mostly LOOK WHAT HAPPENED TO THESE CHILDREN IN IMMIGRANT DETENTION and THEY'RE ROLLING BACK TRANS VOTING RIGHTS and THESE WORKERS GOT LOCKED IN A WAREHOUSE FOR 48 HOURS.

Meanwhile, this conservative email blast was MIGRANTS JUST *WALK* AROUND THIS WALL TO INVADE YOUR COUNTRY! and AMERICAN TOURIST SICKENED BY BLEACH AT DEADLY DOMINICAN RESORT--IS YOUR RESORT SAFE? and EBOLA-RIDDEN ILLEGALS DUMPED IN TEXAS--IS YOUR TOWN NEXT?

There are some very interesting audience assumptions here. The headlines from liberal blasts don't often name a villain, even if one (usually ICE or other government forces) is relatively easily extrapolated.

The focus, however, is the victims, even when a perpetrator is named. And the victims are usually a group of people. There's little or no attempt to connect what's happening directly to YOU, and I don't notice a lot of implicit assumptions about the reader's demographics.

So the appeal here is, perhaps, fear--but it's a fear based on empathy and collective social responsibility. Instead of "what does this mean for ME?" it's very much "we cannot allow this to happen to people/our society." There's almost no direct acknowledgment of the individual.

And I'm on a TON of these email blasts, and that point--look what happened to these people, it's not okay for a society to do this!--is pretty consistent, even as the tone ranges from LOOK WHAT WAS DONE TO THESE INNOCENT CHILDREN! to more measured.

The call to action is usually relatively abstract, too--donate money so we can work to fight this (as opposed to "keep illegals out"/"build a wall"/etc).

Like the conservative blasts, there's usually a balance between outrage and empowerment. The difference is, however, again, in how that empowerment is presented. In the conservative blast it was either "Trump is trying to save you" and/or "you can fight back" (donate, report).

With the liberal ones--well, I'm going to use Bend the Arc here, because while they're a Jewish action group, and HOW they report on stuff is from a Jewish perspective, they're very broad in the issues they tackle (i.e. not just--or even primarily--"Jewish" issues).

So, the tone ISN'T particularly measured--but again, there's not much of an attempt to tie it to "this threatens YOU," even if the implied audience is Jewish.

So here's a relatively typical Bend the Arc video. The empowerment angle here is, like with much of the communications from liberal action groups, a promise that you're not alone.

The other interesting (to me, at least) difference is how the conservative blasts hold individuals responsible.

So, conservative blasts:
-assume audience is white
-tie whatever is happening to threats to YOU, the reader
-empower reader by implying the Trump administration will save them
-include very concrete calls to action for the reader (donate to build a wall, report on your neighbors)

Conservative blasts also:
-often blame an individual in the government or close to it (Tlaib, Cohen, etc.)
-position groups of people (generally NOT in the government) as the threat

Liberal blasts:
-don't obviously assume much about the demographic of the reader
-don't clearly tie reporting to threats to the reader
-appeal to a collective sense of responsibility for society
-attempt to empower by promising the reader that they're not alone

Liberal blasts also:
-position government action as the threat
-don't generally name individuals as the enemy
-contain relatively abstract calls to action (donate to help us fight this)

I mean, obviously I'm biased as fuck, but I read this as liberal news blasts generally trying to appeal to readers' better selves (compassion, willingness to contribute to a large society even if it doesn't immediately and directly benefit them, patience with solutions, etc.)

Whereas conservative blasts are appealing to something a lot more primal (there is a threat to ME, this PERSON is to blame, donate to BUILD A CONCRETE THING).

My worry, as someone who's worked in marketing, is that "do this because you're a compassionate person invested in building a better society and stopping injustice" is not nearly as compelling as "do this to save YOUR skin and punish THIS PERSON."