I think the biggest problem causing Americans to fight each other right now is biased media. Their sources are often one-sided or cherry-picked. They use sensationalist or extremist language instead of simply giving us the facts. Many lie about the facts or present them in a way to create an inaccurate picture of what's happening. Even worse, many are doing it on purpose to profit from the division and outrage they create. They are a cancer in our society.
Even worse, if viewers put this in their heads daily, I believe it trains their brains to think and speak more like those media outlets. Everything from how they see the world to the meaning of common words is molded by their media. Eventually, people immersed in content from opposing outlets start sounding like foreigners to each other. They each think the other lives in an imaginary world that's nothing like reality. They feel it's impossible to even talk to them.
Many outlets use pointed, emotional language with aggressive rhetoric. Some of this can be helpful to learn powerful forms of persuasion when one is promoting one of these views. That requires mostly being factual and kind to one's audience, though. Instead, many outlets' language drives their audience to hate the other side. They might even encourage insulting, protesting, ejecting, or attacking them. Those who perform these acts do so because they put faith in and acted on those outlets' claims.
Those playing us want to keep us in a box. The old trick is to create echo chambers where people hear things like they're already saying. They'll say good things about "us" and our side but bad things about "them" and their side. Automated platforms, like Facebook, often reinforce the world we are living in by showing us what our profile suggests we'll like or hatefully comment on the most. Alternatively, they might mix in their political ideology to create a false impression that it's what everyone else is doing. Those who would take action may either have limited effect or take aim at the wrong people in the wrong ways.
People need to escape these echo chambers and algorithmic feeds to see the bigger picture of what's going on. We need to see the same, comprehensive set of facts about important situations. We need to know sources' biases. We need to be able to understand each other to build a tolerant, adaptable society. We need to constructively criticize only what claims others are actually making, not media nonsense. We can only do God's will if we free our minds from the prison the Devil's institutions are creating.
I believe this also affects human institutions, including churches. My first hint was how churches in my area were mostly white or black. While both races aimed to follow Jesus Christ and His Word, the biggest difference was what politics I heard in their preaching or congregations: often Democrat or liberation theology in black churches; often Republican in white churches. Their political claims were word for word similar to talking points from Democrat or Republican media outlets. They were more likely to describe what their side said about the other side's views instead of listen to the primary sources. If they shared opposing views, it was usually to brief to be accurate or dismissals with mockery.
Some churches were proudly a mixed audience. Their members often brought up how they were multicultural, too. Assessing many of them, I found they usually had worship songs and preaching telling everyone what they wanted to hear. Their messages were un-Biblical or mixed those human philosophies with teaching that was Biblical. Some had programs teaching critical, race theory or a focus on getting members of specific races (eg quotas, race-oriented programs). In summary, multicultural churches usually got that way by appealing to selfish desires and/or racial, liberal politics which drew in people focused on those things.
Now, imagine you're a person who only heard the "facts" reported by one side's outlets. Now, you're in a church where people tell you the opposite and high five each other for mocking people like you. They say people like you "hate" Blacks/Whites, America, immigrants, etc. I know how this feels because I came to Republican churches as a converted liberal. I can assure you that it's hard to strongly connect if they require you to agree with the Bible and all their political claims. It's harder to see the love of Christ in them if they do that while insulting people like you right in front of you.
There were also obstacles to discussion. While complaining about censorship, people would sometimes ask those complaining about ideas that opposed their own beliefs. Those asking would bring evidence with sound arguments worth reviewing. The person demanding others be open with no censorship would then be dismissive, shout over opponents, change the topic, or unwilling to further discuss them. I've had Progressive liberals and MAGA Republicans do this to me on the same day. Some groups ("cancel culture") go even further to silence speech, eject people from the group, or try to get them fired from their jobs.
There are also institutional obstacles. Most institutions, including churches, have power structures where specific people either have official authority or strong influence. The overall institution, or just its influental members, will have specific beliefs on topics that nobody is allowed to challenge or even share dissenting views on. There can be sub-divisions, like individual groups or departments, with further beliefs or totally contradicting the overall institution. These beliefs can be like land mines for people try to explore new ideas. How?
A person takes a risk sharing ideas that contradict common positions in one-sided groups. At the least, the majority of the group reflexively dismisses or attacks the view. At worst, they might pull them aside to tell them not to bring it up for their sake. In either case, it's specific people exerting power over others to enforce pre-existing views. If it's political, I've found they're more likely to quote what they heard in preferred, media outlets than the Bible. If they quote the Bible, the verses will be those selectively quotes by promoters of those politics but not contradicting verses from people with other politics. This happens with doctrine, commentators, and politics.
(Note: That's also why those aiming for upward mobility quote sources that group members already share or who agree with their existing views. Also, their favorite celebrities, schools, etc. There's a thin line between finding common ground and working the crowd.)
What are our solutions? Here's three possibilities:
(Note: Some news outlets, like 1440 Newsletter, claim to report more positive and interesting stories with less bias or sensationalism on political stories. They do illustrate some of those qualities that might inspire other publications. Most, including 1440, fail on bias by mostly using Left or Right sources.)
I'm not sure what to do about this in society at large. We need a massive shift to outlets that do honest, balanced, factual reporting. They can do interpretations or rhetoric, too, so long as they separate it from factual claims where we can mentally filter it. Even if they were biased, having factual outlets with clear biases would let us just pull facts from several outlets. We need to invest in and build those media outlets with honest, principled reporters. This will take much time and money.
But, what if nobody will build it? What will we do in between now and then while stuck with existing, biased outlets?
My baseline idea, which I'm implementing, is a search app restricted to specific, news sites that are a mix from Left to Right. Making a balanced set requires knowing the political profiles of specific outlets. For my users, it would also be nice to have lessons of how to assess media accuracy and bias. We might even share those with others individually, in schools, and in churches. My prototype is here.
It's good to always check prior art to see if we can build on existing work. The best I found is AllSides. Matter of fact, they've done so much of the heavy lifting toward solving this problem that I made a whole page summarizing their work to facilitate peer review. I haven't been paid to do so. Actually, I'm paying them as a new member.
I'm still working on my own solutions, though. I believe we need Christian work in this space to promote Christ-centered, Biblical views of these things. Also, the sinful nature of man means most organizations doing good things become villains over time. Especially if they receive venture capital to try to capture an entire market. ;) For now, we can work with groups like AllSides that are doing great work.
Media distortions are driving the division between Americans, their institutions, and even churches. We need new outlets that are high in facts, low in slant, and cover all positions. Meanwhile, we need to give people both training to handle media bias and sources from a variety of perspectives. Institutions, like churches, will have to make hard decisions about how to internally handle opposing views. We need to teach people these things at an early age. Personally, I'm also promoting AllSides and building search engines as a temporary solution.
(License: This article is licensed as CC By 4.0. You are free to share and remix it as much as you want. Just give credit with a link back.)