Endorsements and editorials are made solely by the ownership of this newspaper. As is the case at most newspapers across the nation, The Spokesman-Review newsroom and its editors are not a part of this endorsement process. (Learn more.)

Variety of views remains our mission

Sun., Aug. 20, 2017

We live in age of rapid change, cultural upheaval, intense political partisanship, alternative facts and hypersensitivity, all of which makes producing an opinion page a greater challenge.

We regret to report the state of discourse is in decline.

People are increasingly filtering social connections based on their viewpoints, with activist gestures large and small. These political silos feature their own jargon, acronyms and other linguistic shortcuts. Terms like “snowflake,” “white privilege” and “(fill-in-the-blank)-phobic” are understood, because everyone is on the same page.

But a newspaper isn’t on any of those pages. The Opinion section is meant to reflect a variety of viewpoints, and we believe there is great value in that. Where else will this occur, if not here?

This leads to charges of “providing a platform for” or “normalizing” … you name it: treason, hate, bigotry and sin are just a few examples. Intolerance for opposing views is rising, and the “hate speech” card is fraying from overuse. The term “hate” is losing its meaning. Not a week goes by that a particular letter, cartoon, editorial or column isn’t labeled “hate.”

But the Opinion section must resist this increasingly expansive definition. If you think about it, differences of opinion can arise from many factors. The debate over Confederate statues provides a current example of the binary thinking that bedevils thoughtful discussion. Are the people who want to leave them up automatically racist?

If so, then how to explain the NPR-PBS/Marist University poll conducted after the Charlottesville mayhem showing that 62 percent of respondents want the statues to remain, including 44 percent of African Americans (as oppose to 40 percent who want them removed)?

In the same poll, 86 percent of respondents disagree with the white supremacy movement and 94 percent disagree with the Ku Klux Klan.

Rapidly assigning labels of “hate,” “racist” and “bigot” to statue defenders misses the mark for many of them.

The transgender issue has also become a flashpoint, because of the Aug. 12 column by the Rev. Steve Massey. We’ve already published a guest column from a transgender writer and some letters in response. The letters reflect different viewpoints, and we’re sure to hear that we are providing a platform for hate.

We won’t print all the letters, and we are weeding out the intentionally hurtful ones. These are judgment calls, and we won’t always get them right. But as we did during the gay rights debates, we will present a variety of views. It’s more complicated than affixing a label to one side of the debate and then silencing it.

On a final note, we ask that people make a greater effort to seek out the other side of any controversy. What makes them think differently? What motivates their opposing view? Understanding doesn’t mean acceptance, but it may cool the rhetoric.

Plus, if you actually want to persuade someone (rather than attack them), it helps to speak their language. If that means venturing outside the silo, so be it. Those walls are doing more harm than good anyway.