ZDNet's Joe Brockmeier gets it. He understands framing. Here's his post on blogs.zdnet.com (which runs on WordPress--neat!):
Framing the discussion: Linux vs. Microsoft: Microsoft knows that it's unlikely that the majority of IT professionals will take the results [of studies which conclude that their products are superior] at face value, once they learn that a study has been sponsored by the vendor. But, by releasing the study anyway, Microsoft has a chance at framing the discussion. Microsoft's Ryan Gavin, a director of platform strategy, said what he hopes the studies do is give IT executives some data to help frame a discussion, even if they disregard the specific numbers contained within the materials. "Customers are looking for ways to think through and evaluate criteria," Gavin said. "You don't have to believe what the numbers are."
So, they can't tell you what to think, but maybe they can guide how you think. You'll notice that the studies that come from Microsoft tend favor the software giant not only in the studies' results, which most people are rightly skeptical of, but also the topics. If you look at Microsoft's "Get the Facts" page, you'll see that Microsoft wants to encourage discussion about indemnification, ease of management, total cost of ownership and use by small and medium-sized businesses. [all emphasis his]
Even if the Microsoft-sponsored researchers forgot to bias their statistics, and concluded that Linux is better at the things Microsoft wants to emphasize, Microsoft wins by keeping the terms of the debate where it wants them. Yes, it's important that Linux counter FUD on the TCO and ease-of-use fronts, but for every article that disputes a Microsoft claim, Linux enthusiasts should write 5 articles about the things Linux is really about.
Except the Linux community doesn't have much of an organization, much less an agenda, and much less a PR budget. Democrats do, and for every dollar they spend demonstrating that they're better than Republicans at national security, or more fiscally responsible, they need to spend 5 dollars articulating their priorities and sticking to them. Catchy words and slogans are nothing unless the ideas behind them are well-formed and proactively infused into public debate.
Everything else in that post has a similar analogue to political strategy. A good read.
Linux and framing are my two major intellectual pursuits right now, so it's nice to see them get together and not be totally bored by eachother's company. Examples like this can be useful for decoupling framing from the emotional noise of politics, and showing how the ideas behind political framing apply to other areas of discourse as well.