Readers will find of special interest the second chapter on the relevance of framing to communication. As I have noted, there is no such thing as "unframed" information. Whether you are a scientist, a public information officer, or a journalist, the choice is not whether to frame or not to frame, but rather how to frame a complex and uncertain issue for the public and with what goals in mind.
Here's how the Columbia University researchers define the relevance of framing:
Framing is the setting of an issue within an appropriate context to achieve a desired interpretation or perspective. The intention is not to deceive or manipulate people, but to make credible climate science more accessible to the public. Indeed, since it is impossible not to frame an issue, climate change communicators need to ensure they consciously select a frame that will resonate with their audience.
On this topic, a recent book chapter I wrote outlining four key ethical guidelines when applying framing to science communication is now in print as part of an excellent edited volume titled "Communicating Biological Sciences: Ethical and Metaphorical Dimensions." I will have more on this chapter and volume later this week.