Should Journalists Be Mediators?

Last year I attended the Society of Professional Journalists’s regional conference in New York City and met Mariel Fiori. She’s the founder and managing editor of La Voz, a Spanish-language monthly with a large following in the mid-Hudson region.
Since we not only are both immigrant women but also report on newcomers’ lives in the US, we shared concerns about negative labeling and how it affects the way the public perceives immigrants, especially if they’re undocumented. Pejorative views abound: immigrants steal our jobs; they are criminals; they pay no taxes; they exploit the welfare system. Such opinions are so injurious that they’re stalling civil discourse and preventing it from moving forward.
People really need to come together and to talk, we felt. Perhaps organizing neighborhood forums to dispel those myths might help overcome prejudice and help people coexist. How to go about producing them and finding the resources necessary to sustain the effort, however, would be a full-time job itself. We ended on that note, comforted by the thought that we had at least validated each other’s ideas.
The good news, though, is that Spaceship Media began to do a similar work in 2016. The nonprofit launched during the presidential election and uses “dialogue journalism” to bridge the gap between groups with opposing political sentiments. I found that out this week during the engagement class at the Craig Newmark Graduate School of Journalism, at CUNY, where Alyxaundria Sanford and Kristine Villanueva, came as guest speakers. They’re journalists who mediate online conversations at Spaceship, as well as alumnae of the school’s social journalism program.
“The goal is to reduce polarization,” said Sanford. “Spaceship uses its platform to build community and restore trust in media.”
Trust is sorely needed. Sanford and Villanueva moderate The Many, a group of about 400 women from Alabama and California, with diverging political beliefs. Sanford’s and Villanueva’s job is to spur conversation around issues — say, cultural appropriation, immigration and so on — then provide the women with either fact checks, original reporting or both to inform their views. Partnering media organizations provide the reporting.
The results are very positive, said Villanueva. “We are noticing an ability to talk civilly,” she said. And the women in The Many see the journalists’ effort to come back with unbiased information.
“They see that we’re trying to bring them together, and it works,” she said.
There are times when participants engage in conversation that doesn’t need much moderation. Overall, the effort has given the women confidence that they are learning how to have a constructive discussion, which many people around the country don’t think is even possible.

So, do I think that journalists could or should be mediators and create opportunities to move the national dialogue forward? I do, because I also believe that our profession is evolving from the “attention model,” which values page views v. connecting with the public, as Jeff Jarvis sometimes says. He’s the founder of social journalism at the Newmark School, and the author of its seminal manifesto, Geeks Bearing Gifts.
But it’s a complex job that cannot be done casually. Part of what makes The Many successful is that the women in the group are vetted to make sure they will sustain a respectful tone toward one another and are open to hearing someone else’s view before they criticize it. In return, the group offers a safe environment where — unlike most online realms, particularly for women — participants won’t be attacked and systematically trolled.
For the journalists there are occupational hazards, too. Both Sanford and Villanueva had to learn how to deal with the vitriol that can surface and avoid letting it escalate to a personal attack. Villanueva found herself in that position when the group discussed the cancellation of Roseanne Barr’s series reboot after the actress posted a racist comment on Twitter.
If I could acquire the skills Sanford and Villanueva have, I would consider adding “dialogue journalism” to my toolbox, at least from an intellectual point of view. I would need to experience it to know what I could bring to it, and if the approach might be right for me.

Generally speaking, though, could mediation dim conflicts that affect m community of choice either internally or externally? My intended group consists of newcomers facing integration hurdles, particularly those well educated in their home country who end up underemployed in the United States. Researchers call the phenomenon immigrant brain waste.
Americans are divided over immigration policy, but so are immigrants. For example, a subgroup of those with legal status think that undocumented immigrants are breaking the law and shouldn’t be tolerated.
I don’t see how dialogue could hurt. Welcoming Week, the yearly nationwide event recently celebrated around the country, adopts the same principle: bringing people together in a convivial setting, in this case to encourage them to know one another and foster unity.
I would favor that approach, an offline one, since I believe the fundamental need to reestablish a sense of community often pushes immigrants to gather in a physical space.






