Advocacy to improve food security in remote Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities in Australia: Measuring the impact of message frames

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether different message frames increase public support for a community-identified policy solution to improve food security in remote Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities in Australia. DESIGN: An online experimental study in which participants were randomly assigned to one of three message frames: human rights, fairness, or community-identified solution, or a control condition. Logistic regression models were used to assess associations between message frames and support for an electricity subsidy policy. Interaction analyses explored whether participant characteristics moderated these effects. SETTING: Australia. PARTICIPANTS: A nationally representative sample of 1,555 Australian adults recruited through an online panel. RESULTS: Message framing had limited overall impact on policy support. The human rights frame generated the highest support for the proposed subsidy, while the fairness frame generated the lowest; however, these differences were modest. We found that regardless of frame used, Greens supporters, those with postgraduate degrees, or those who watched the news more frequently, tended to have higher levels of agreement with the policy solution. CONCLUSION: Although message framing is widely used in advocacy to increase policy support, its impact in this context appears constrained. These findings underscore the complexity of shifting public attitudes toward policies benefiting structurally disadvantaged communities and suggest that more targeted, audience-specific framing may be necessary. Further research should explore why certain frames underperform among particular groups and examine how agreement and emotional engagement jointly shape support for policy change.