GBH Media Summit Livestream: Laying the Groundwork: State of Democracy Today
GBH
[{'start': '830.493', 'end': '832.493', 'text': ')  (Captioner on standby and  waiting for event to begin. )   (Captioner on standby and  waiting for event to begin. )   (Captioner on standby and  waiting for event to begin. )   Democracy Summit GBH Democracy Summit (Captioner on standby and  waiting for event to begin. )   (Captioner on standby and  waiting for event to begin. )   The  (Captioner on standby and  waiting for event to begin. )   (Captioner on standby and  waiting for event to begin. )   (Technical/audio  intermittence).    (Technical/audio  intermittence).    (Technical/audio  intermittence).     (Technical/audio  intermittence).       (Technical/audio  intermittence). (Technical/audio  intermittence).    (Technical/audio  intermittence).    ≫ I wanted to spend five  minutes giving a political  science perspective on the  stall state of politic to set the stage  today. Undeniably American politics  polar rised today .  That polarization runs deep  and wide. When we look at the ideology of lawmakers, moderate lawmakers not just in congress  all way down through the state and  local level have largely  disappeared and states are  either red or blue so when we  look at senate delegations  three states that have democrat and  republican in the delegation. The policy are divergent  whether you\'re looking at abortion  policy or gun laws or voting  access, right? They are increasingly  different.  And the public  views of those elected  officials are also divergent. Just four percent of  self-identified democrat  democrats approve of Trump. In you Biden\'s final days two  percent of republicans approved of him. When political scientist talk  about concerns over polarization they are talking  about affect of polarization. Negative feelings we hold  towards the other side.  It\'s  not just that we disagree with  each other, it\'s that we distrust  and dislike the other side. Not just politicians but each  other.  When you say look for  instance,  at how democrats and republicans engage on social  media what you see is hostility and divisiveness and  outrage.  Here\'s the hitch. Much of this partisan animosity stem from misperceptions. It\'s because not that we  disagree at the elite level. We are actually much less  extreme than we think , right,  because somebody voted for  Trump doesn\'t mean they endorse all of his views. People are more moderate than  the choices presented to them. They are more supportive of  political violence.  They are  hostile towards us.  When we  look at public opinion poles take election poles after the last election. 21 percent of Trump voters say  gun laws should be less strict  than they are now .  38 percent of Trump voters  think that abortion should be legal in almost all  or most cases.  Barely half of  Trump voters say that he would be the better  person to lead the country for  climate change.  It\'s important for us to remember that we are more similar than  sometimes we think. The puzzle then is where do  these misperceptions come from ?  What can we do about them? Part of the answer is about  human psychology but part of it is about the information  environment. Social media and media are  incentivize to amplify our differences so  the conversations that we\'ll be having today, will help us get  at this question of how sit that we can challenge these  misperceptions and start to  improve on that polarization.   Thank you. ≫ Please welcome to the stage  Ann Curry.   ≫ANN CURRY:  Good morning,  everyone.  Having been asked to say a few more words to the many good ones already  spoken but guessing by now you might  require a little more caffeine  I will keep it short. Whatever journalism becomes in  this digital revolution that is now upon us or whether we call it  journalism in the future or  something else, humanity needs and  deserves at the very least  access to verifiable  information and for the  powerful to be held to account. These two fundamental jobs of journalism, yes, require  skill and sometimes courage,  but Iening mostly they require  ethical thinking. Think about how to best work  for the public interest more  than the people who pay our  checks. How to stay independent but  holding to no one, no interest, not even our own. This was better said by old man spud so named as he was from America\'s potato capitol .   They was then a Veteran local  reporter covering a story alongside a newly midnighted wide eyed  recent journalism graduate to  whom he suddenly turned to say  "listen Ann , don\'t trust anybody ".   Everybody wants you to tell a  story just the way they want it told.  Don\'ts even trust  yourself because you too can be blind to the facts. Hell, he said, leaning infor  the clencher. Don\'t even trust your own  mother. Because even she has an ax to  grind "Now, that is a fact  actually .   As for holding the powerful to  account the 20th century war  correspondent Martha war horn said it as well as anyone .  "It must be someplace on the record because otherwise they  can get by with anything if you are silent then they can rewrite it any way  they want. They can make it look great  afterwards, so there is a point in the record.  "  To these two narratives for any dream of democracy to survive allow one more in  ethic and often forgotten one. To have humanity while  gathering and weighing what information  should be shared about people  to other people.  And you bet I even have a quote for that. And it came in a letter. Not from a journalist but from  a notable observer. The Daliy lamb llama after an  interview. "If world at large started  looking more at positive while not  ignoring the negative I am  confident we can all contribute to a happier society each of us including the media in general has this  responsibility. There is an earnestness I am  seeing in many young people  today in college, including at  Yale where I\'m a fellow.  Students were  saying they are alarmed by what hearing and seeing in the  media.  Who want to practice  journalism ethically for the public good  but these same students are also afraid there are too  few newsrooms where this work  is still possible. Will monarchy squander these  next generations of soarly needed truth seekers. The next Marty Baron and Chris  and has been ins and will we let the public struggle for the verifiable information  they observe including those  who can\'t afford to subscribe  or will we keep trying? Going forth and seeking new  ideas, not only to fix what\'s  broken to build it back better.  " I say we\'re here.  Let\'s hit  it.  And may the coffee be  strong.  Thank you!      (Cheers and applause.)   (Cheers and applause. )  ≫ Thank you so much, Ann, for  those inspiring words .  We\'re  so thrilled to have you here  today.  All right. Team, it\'s time to get to work .  This was a session where we  heard from many fabulous  presenters but we have a series of sessions planned today that we  want to be interactive, we want to  hear from you, and so at 10:15 which is now so we  might give you a couple extra  minutes.  We will be in three  spaces. This is calendarer wood studio. To our leftover here is Frasier studio and to our right is  Yawkey.  If you look at the  schedule that\'s been printed it will tell you what rooms sessions  are in, and monitors and other  places you can get that  information. We have an exciting day  planned.  I encourage you to  engage as much as possible, and we\'re really hopeful'}]