In pursuit of critical thinking

We have a problem in this country of extreme political divisiveness. The concept of governance for the common good seems to be long forgotten. It concerns me. I believe it has resulted in incivility at a disturbing level which we are experiencing in both our major cities, on social media, and at the voting booth. If I were inclined to blame, I could blame the political class, or mass media, or education.

As a person who consumes news media from a variety of sources, I can tell you with confidence that folks who only watch the big three networks (or CNN), and those who watch only Fox and Newsmax (or listen to AM Radio) live in entirely different universes. It’s astounding to me how different interpretations can be of any given story. What we need is more critical thinking.

Politicians, media and education are all stakeholders in the process. Politicians answer to us, so if they are the source of the problem, then we are to blame. Corporate media entities respond to market forces, but ultimately, I’m inclined to think that education might hold the answer. That much helps me remain optimistic.

As for the media, it started with the 24-hour news cycle. CNN and Wolf Blitzer (best name ever) were a credible, go-to source back during the first Gulf war. Even the people being bombed watched CNN. Then competition entered into the equation and the niche marketing began. There was also a realization that straight news reporting was harder than fielding talking heads. CNN turned left and Roger Ailes at Fox (a former GOP strategist) turned right in spite of the “fair and balanced” tagline. I understand that they intended to balance the left-leaning popular media, but that’s not what the slogan implied. Target marketing became the rule of the day.

As a digital television consumer, I actually find myself going to Sky News (on Pluto) as my source for straight news. It reminds me of the old Huntley and Brinkley or Cronkite days. They are a British outfit, so there is a substantial amount of European news mixed in, but they pay substantial attention to US news, and offer it without much spin. Then they play a song and show me the weather in the UK. It’s always raining in Scotland.

Recall that in the wake of September 11 of 2001, an expository committee determined that our intelligence communities were working within “information silos.” Are we not committing the same mistake when we only consume news that conforms with our personal views? The notion of having to agree with everything that we read, hear or watch is a foreign concept to me, yet it seems to have pervaded the business of mass media, and seems to have caught on with the public.

I consider myself to be center-right, so I consume a fair amount of Fox news, a little bit of Newsmax and I dial into AM Radio when something big is going on. My favorites are panel programs like “The Five” where at least they have Juan Williams to express an alternative view.

I was a big fan of the Mclaughlin Group for about 35 years until it was pulled from PBS at the end of last year. I enjoyed watching Pat Buchanan and Eleanor Clift go at it. I like to hear both sides of the argument.

I also watch CBSN on a daily basis. By “watch,” I mean that I watch it with the sound turned off while I’m listening to Bob and Tom at 5:00 a.m. The captions are big enough for me to see without putting my spectacles on. It’s important to me, however, to get a whiff of the other agendas. I don’t feel informed unless I know what both sides are up to and they are never 100% wrong. Nor are they 100% right.

So here’s my thought, my suggestion and my thesis: When the internet was first introduced, academia stepped up and gave us lessons on how to discern reliable information resources from those that were sketchy. Those same educators also tell us to vary our diet with a balance of proteins, vegetables, and grains. Perhaps it would be beneficial for academia to include a curriculum on taking in a varied media diet as well. As with dietary recommendations, these things should remain a matter of personal choice, but it wouldn’t hurt us to have the conversation and appropriate direction.

I think we would all be better for it. We might even get back to working together as a community. I can only hope.