In the last couple of weeks, I’ve spiked* two contributed opinion pieces from writers on opposite sides of the political fence — one conservative, the other liberal — espousing completely different views. Both were reasonably well crafted, cogent, and forceful, the work of very credible people. And neither was right for The Monitor’s “Views” page.
That set me to thinking about what is right.
As readers may, by now, have tired of hearing me say, The Monitor aims to be a solutions-focused news organization. Our mission statement commits us to “exploring both urgent challenges and the responses to those challenges…investigating wrongdoing and revealing how what’s broken could be fixed.”
In fact, The Monitor recently was selected by the Solutions Journalism Network, a non-profit organization that I helped build, to participate in a nine-month-long cohort of rural news organizations from across the U.S. that want to bring a solutions lens into the core of their work.
Our “Views” page has been problematic in that regard. We have worked hard to engage writers that represent the full spectrum of perspective in Jefferson County. And that effort has succeeded, somewhat: I’d guess that more people see themselves and their opinions reflected here. But that’s come, I would say, at a price.
Too much of what appears on this page has been anchored in political extremity, yet most of our audience probably lives closer to the middle. As one person noted in this year’s subscriber survey: ““I’d like to see more balanced, moderate editorialists and less preaching.”
Too much has been tethered to national politics. The Monitor provides greatest value, I believe, by describing and making sense of what happens locally and in our state.
And too many “Views” pieces have been consumed with the sins of The Other, described via a filter that turns nuance into a black-and-white view of the world. They reflect, I fear, a burgeoning zero-sum logic in our society that says, you’re either with us, or you’re not. Us or them.
Don’t get me wrong: It is, of course, everyone’s right to disagree with whomever they choose, and to say so. That tension, expressed respectfully, is often productive: Friction can be an accelerant for change.
But it can’t just be about finger-pointing and blame. The Views page should be about identifying and working toward opportunities for improvement. If we see a problem, what’s the better path? How can we fix what’s wrong? What’s working?
In a poll conducted this spring, the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research and Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights found that 74% of Americans believed the news media is heightening political polarization in the country. That damning view was shared by both Republicans and Democrats.
The Monitor will no longer be part of that.
Our “Views” page will, at its best, continue to reflect opinion from a broad range of perspective, “not beholden to one path or another,” as our mission statement says. But it also will reflect the complexity of our world and our community, and of the human beings living here. And it will constantly seek higher ground — the very real possibility that problems can be solved, and that people can come together across differences to produce constructive change.
I’d love for you to become part of the civil discourse that fuels this page. If you have an opinion, and a solution, please share it with your community. Join in a conversation about making things better.
*This usage of “spike” is a vestige of a time when newspaper editors, among other office workers, impaled sheets of paper on pointed metal spindles. The devices have long ago fallen out of favor. As has paper.
Reach Publisher Keith Hammonds at keith@boulder-monitor.com
