Overcoming Conflict by Seeing Others

No Gravatar

This Cisco ad captures what I hope media can do to bring countries and cultures together: linking people, especially children, real time.   There’s no reason, given the technology today, that we should be so ignorant of others.  That ignorance fuels the belief that our way is the only way–and the US tends to be high on the solipsism meter anyway.

We need to see that other countries are made up of people working hard to take care of their families with hopes, dreams, and good times and hard times, just like ours.  This is the only way to begin to break down the us-versus-them perspective.  While it is a natural and hard-wired response to create a sense of group affiliation, it is also a root source of conflict.  When times are hard, it’s easy to blame the “other” guy, whether it’s at home or abroad.  It’s easy to see the ‘other guy’ as all the same.  Those Arabs, Chinese, immigrants, Republicans, Democrats, those Muslims, those Christians, those bankers, those politicians, those teenagers, those   _______ (fill in your object of choice–you know you have one).  In spite of how much lip service we give to political correctness and not negatively stereotyping, we do it every day.  It’s just that the object of approved targeting changes.

History is full of heinous behavior when people are worried and scared and look for an ‘other’ to blame.  No country is immune–not even us.  Think about McCarthyism, Klu Klux Klan, and Guantanamo as some of the examples of abuses of power that people readily tolerate when they are scared.  That’s why it’s important to have what Amartya Sen’s ideal of  identity complexity–the ability to define ourselves in multiple ways so that we can recognize what we have in common with many different people.


Sen, A. (2007) Identity and Violence: The Illusion of Destiny. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.

Twitter, YouTube, and Another Man’s Shoes

No Gravatar

Two things came across my RSS feeds today that show how technology is impacting our information environment. First, YouTube has added a News Manager (Olivia) to promote Citizen News content:

Second was a blog entry by CNET’s Dan Farber on Twitter as a viable means of spreading information. (See Jon’s last entry below, too.)

I am simultaneously excited by the prospects of such a wide range of information and the complications of it. How do I find the interesting and important stuff? (Certainly not always the same thing. Think Mentos and Diet Coke.) How do I manage the information flows that meet the interesting or important criteria? And a perhaps cautionary concern (or call it cynical) of how I can perform due diligence on all this stuff? How do I determine quickly enough to be useful what is reliable, objective, white-washed, agenda-laden, mean-spirited, or just plain wrong? We see errors enough in the official reporting establishments that suggest this is no easy task (like the go-to CNN footage showing Chinese soldiers in Tibet that turned out to be Nepalese soldiers–oops).

There are continually emerging ways of monitoring information–from RSS feeds, feed consolidators, listservs, trolling MySpace, Facebook, and Twitter, and, or course, just hearing about things from friends. For me, the challenge is to make sure that I am not just keeping up with information, but trying to achieve a balance in perspective. (My husband John reads the front pages of 30 foreign language papers for this, when he is not actually visiting the places he’s curious about–he reads a lot faster than I do, language issues notwithstanding)

While I frequently wonder how these bloggers, emailers, and YouTubers know so many interesting people, I remind myself that generally our sources are self-selected, and therefore make it unlikely that we get opinions from the “other side” whatever that might be. With the abundance of information, it becomes all the easier to reaffirm our own points of view. To give a nod to cognitive psychology, it really cuts down on the cognitive dissonance and that pesky discomfort that comes from uncertainty.

The challenge is to make sure that knowing all this stuff doesn’t make us so scared that we don’t want to know it. There are no shortage of advice from dignitaries such as Yogi Berra, Will Rogers, and St. Augustin about seeing things from another’s point of view. It turns out a lot of things are at stake, just ask the social and political scientists who spend time trying to resolve intergroup conflict.

The worst kinds of intractable conflict starts with fear in our own brains. The great thing about the new journalism is that it’s not linear; it comes at you from everywhere. A lot of people worry about this, but I think it’s a good thing. With luck, a bunch of stuff will sneak in our brains that we hardly notice and wedge us out of our comfort zone into seeing a bigger picture.

Copyright © · Media Psychology Research Center · on WordPress ·