Have you noticed? There is a new trend in television newscasting.
It started six or eight years ago. The program host would ask a question. The guest would start to answer. Abruptly, with less than half the answer out, the host would jump In, interrupting with a follow-on question or comment. It is as if he were saying, “Your answer is too stupid. It just doesn’t go where I want to go. If you had half a brain, you would say…………”
Oh, and by the way, this is not a left wing or a right wing phenomenon. Both sides do it. Chris Matthews pioneered the practice on MSNBC’s Hardball. Fox’s Neil Cavuto constantly emulates Matthews by stepping all over his guests when their response fails to serve his agenda.
Unfortunately for today’s viewers, this trend has evolved into an even more disconcerting practice. You need only look at CNBC’s Fast Money. It is no longer a lone commentator acting offensively. Now, we see a panel of “experts” acting like ill-disciplined children. It goes like this. A simple question is posed by one member of the panel. Immediately all the others start jabbering away, talking over their colleagues. No one can be understood. Meaningful commentary has given way to circus. Waste of time.
Okay, you might ask so what? Why not just change the channel? True, that would solve the immediate problem. But doing so ignores the underlying fact that we have become a society where thoughtful discussion is no longer valued. Civil discourse, objective consideration of all sides, has become a thing of the past. When facing opinions that differ from our own, we shout down the opposition and bully our way to “victory.”
Can we do something to reverse this trend? Can we get back to a world where contentious issues can be discussed calmly and respectfully? Yes, I believe we can.
It starts with you. Next time you encounter an aggressive conversational bully, wait until he pauses for breath, then smile and say, “That is interesting, but may I ask you a question?” Huh? He was expecting some sort of in-kind blast or accusation of his stupidity. Confused, he will nod his head. You then say, “Do you really believe what you have just said?” Off course he does. He nods again. You say, “If you really do, you will have the courage to listen to other points of view. So, will you please let me speak without interruption?”
(For a slightly more subtle variation of this strategy, see two other essays: “Three Powerful Words” and “Openminded”. They are posted on my website, www.responsibilitytoday.com)
If enough people take this approach (smile, be calm, and ask a question), we can gradually nudge our way back to a world of civility and polite discourse.
Can we improve the character of broadcast journalism? Probably not. But we can always change the channel.