Residents of nine states – Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Missouri,
Montana, Ohio, Oregon, Vermont and Washington – will see a boost to
their local economy from a state minimum wage increase taking effect in
the new year.
Unfortunately, media coverage of the change varies across place and often undermines public support for this progressive step.
For example, an
article in the Cincinnati Enquirer begins with the suggestion that the raise benefits only the workers getting the increase:
“Local minimum wage workers will have something to celebrate with the coming of a new year.”
The
reporters continue with this narrow frame by implying that certain
employers and the state’s 300,000 minimum wage workers will be the only
ones to feel the impact of the change.
The
online comments
regarding the article illustrate the destructive debate that inevitably
flows from this framing. When the reporter suggests the impact is only
felt by a small group of employees and certain employers, the debate
devolves to the worthiness of workers and an us-vs-them depiction of
who benefits and who suffers.
For example, one commenter shares
an out-of-date (but widely held) perspective on the ability of workers
to climb the wage ladder.
“You’re not supposed to
survive on minimum wage as an adult, because it’s supposed to be the
starting point not what you make an hour when you have chosen to add
more mouths to feed. Secondly, if you start at minimum wage, within a
very short period of time you will get raises. now the conditions are:
you have to show up on time, do a good job, and make yourself a
valuable employee. Wow, big surprise, then you continue up the ladder.”
Another
commenter illustrates how the “charity” framing leads to the us-vs-them
debate that undermines public support for improving jobs.
“all
this does is hurt the middle class. Push up the wages off teenagers and
young college students, which force up prices in stores for the average
middle class america….stupid stupid stupid.”
We
could debate the assertions of these commenters. But that’s not an
argument we really want to have – or that we can win with “facts”.
Public understanding of this issue won’t change just because we have
good data.
Instead, it’s our job to work for better media coverage.
Our
own talking points should start with the fact that these increases
strengthen the local economy by ensuring that there are better jobs in
the community – a benefit that accrues to everyone.