A Letter To NPR's "Left, Right And Center"

Dear LR&C,

Over the past few weeks I have been finding myself changing stations or simply turning my raido off rather than continue to listen to the program.

Perhaps the content of your program has changed over the year or so that I have been listening. Or perhaps I have just gotten more sensitive to the kind of discourse on the program, such as it is.

I do not care for talk radio, and neither do I care for talk television. I do not find either format especially enlightening. Howver, I was was willing to listen to your program becuse you promised an alternative to "the usual talking heads".

Looking back over the past year, could I say that my expectations as to your promise were met? My impression is this: Over the course of the the level of civility has declined. This decline in civility has been accompanied by a polarization in the positions taken by your talkers. And this polarization seems to result in your talkers speaking more in slogans, or taking formulaic positions, rather than thoughtfully responding. I feel that people are no longer responding to what the other person has said, but rather they are responding to a position taken by a "side".

Perhaps such a result is inevitable since there seems to be a legal background in your mix of talkers. As I understand it, a major goal, the primary goal, of a legal encounter like a trial, it to win. The concomitant outcome being that the other side loses.

But, no. It's not that simple. I believe this because I have listened to a number of "debate" type of discussions on BBC programs which seem much more civil. Perhaps the issues were not as pressing or the beliefs as closely held, but I don't think so. The debaters just seemed to me more civilized and articulate. But that's their tradition. I do not expect Americans to be able to debate like that.

To get to my point. What I hear political debate or discussion in America consists of an interaction that frames the outcome as a zero-sum game: if one wins, the other must lose. What sustains this paradigm is pride and perhaps the belief that there is only one solution to any problem.

But are they even talking about the same problem?

I think all talking head programs that I have heard do not want to identify the problem, rather, each wants to advocate their solution to what they think the problem is.

What is missing in American public political discourse is an attempt to solve a common problem.

I recall reading about a study or project where people who believed in "choice" and people who believed in "the right to life" were brought together and given the opportunity to discuss the issue. What the organizers discovered was that neither sides as opposed to what the other believed the framing of the problem would have us believe. Of course these groups did not consist of professional ideologues or advocates.