Uncivil Civil Discourse
I haven’t written many posts lately. And I’ve wondered why. At first I blamed the fact — alas — that my home/office was flooded during a mid-December rainstorm. Then I blamed getting caught up in the holidays. But finally I realized that I was suffering — again! — from an overexposure to uncivil civil discourse.
I love public debate and the lively exchange of ideas. And I think that speeches, especially those given by leaders – politicians, executives, community leaders, religious authorities, and the like – should set forth big ideas, whether they’re popular or not. As a result, I’ve found this past year or so overwhelmingly painful.
The tone and tenor of our public discourse has too frequently become polarized and polarizing, shrill and strident, malicious, abusive, and offensive. Shouting has replaced listening. Courtesy is nonexistent. Name calling is common. Evidence, logic, and the common good are commonly ignored. People who expound ideas that others dislike are shouted down or maligned.
I let the negativity get to me. I needed to take a break from it all. Now I’m back.
In this blog I want to reflect on and host a discussion of speeches and presentations — the good, the bad, and the boring — in a civil manner. I don’t mind controversy. I kind of like it. But I won’t tolerate discourtesy.
Next up: a discussion of what civil discourse means. Any ideas you’d like to share?
Tags: civil discourse, public debate
January 6th, 2010 at 12:10 pm
Chris — Wow, this is a tough one. Here’s my analysis of how this has turned into such a problem.
1) Television IS the culture. It’s the one thing everyone has in common. Even people who don’t read newspapers or have high-speed Internet watch television.
2) Television is ENTIRELY money-driven. I know this is a provocative statement, but I worked in television from 1991 to 2005 — first as an Entertainment Reporter, then as a producer for various cable venues, including Discovery, TLC and A&E. Every show I worked on was pushed in the same direction — “Make it edgier” (i.e. trashier). Why? “If we don’t get a number, we’re out of business. Do whatever it takes to get eyeballs.”
3) Because of this dynamic — “get eyeballs at any cost” — television (and therefore the culture) has become a race to the bottom. Who is the new cable sensation? Glenn Beck. How’d he get there? By clamping jumper cables on the O’Reilly/Limbaugh show model, and amping up the crazy. (There’s a reason Beck came out of the “Morning Zoo” radio world). I guarantee the next “big thing” in cable news will make Glenn Beck look like Edward R. Murrow.
If you’re a Producer who wants to get a news program on the air, what are your choices? You’ve got to put something on the air that’s even more provocative than Beck. In that discussion, the words “civil discourse” will not be mentioned.
This is very much like the arms race between American and the Russians in the 1960’s. Once your goal is to dominate the other side, you have no other choice but to keep upping the ante. Louder, more strident, more emotional….
I have no solution for this culturally. My personal solution has been to turn off my television.
January 6th, 2010 at 7:17 pm
drprocter, I’m afraid I agree with you. Getting attention has become more important than getting it right. Outlandish claims and outrage are the coin of the realm. And like you I don’t know what to do about it. My impulse is, unfortunately, to mount my high horse and make impassioned attacks — which would only make me like the people whose tactics I so much despise.
January 8th, 2010 at 3:28 pm
I agree with drpoctor that telvision producers may be contibuting to the fact that the political and legislative debates excerpted on TV news shows seem to have more resemblance to the disputes on the Jerry Springer Show than to intellegent discourse.
But is that what we want in our politics and governance? The educated tune out, and look for summary information on the internet. The audiences looking for conflict tune in and join the uncivil mobs that heckle and disrupts legislators’ atempts to have civil discourse with their constituents. None of it contributes to good government, good communication, or respect for legislators.
January 8th, 2010 at 7:18 pm
Margaret,
Like you, I don’t want it in our politics and governance. I don’t want it at all. It reminds me of unsupervised, out-of-control third graders during recess, pushing each other around and calling each other names. Any ideas how to end it?
May 18th, 2010 at 4:08 am
Well I definitely enjoyed reading it. This article provided by you is very helpful for good planning.