How does framing tie into Latour's "web-worky" emphasis?

The most important aspects of what N & M mean by framing science is the aspect of relevance and the availability of information and the level at which it is understood by different receivers of scientific information. N&M argue that the information being given to one who is outside of the realm of science must be able to find how it relates to them in order to find it important and give the information their time and attention. It also has to be available to outsiders in a particularly attractive manner and be at a level in which it can be easily understood. The scientific community must take on the responsibility of sharing pertinent information with the public and this duty requires attention to how the information is conveyed.

The relationship I see between framing and Latour’s argument is simply located in the fact that scientific information is interconnected with the world around it in many different realms – political, social, economical, moral, philosophical, and even daily life. Taking this into consideration, it is then extremely important that people hear/see this information, want to see and hear it, understand it, and understand how it relates to them in a way that is beneficial with respect to these different areas of human life. If scientific information is merely “Technical” and “objective” – which it is not – then only people who are interested in objectivity and technology are going to be interested in the information offered to them. However, as Latour argues, scientific information plays an important role in our society, so much so that common people need to know what’s going on and how it affects their lives. With this burden put on the scientific community – they must answer. They must act and do as media does (perhaps) and frame this important information in a way that is catchy and demonstrates its important in the lives of the non-scientific human.