It's Official: We're Broken.

This is how Wikipedia defines politics:

Politics is the way that people living in groups make decisions. Politics is about making agreements between people so that they can live together in groups such as tribes , cities , or countries . In large groups, such as countries, some people may spend a lot of their time making such agreements. These people are called politicians .

Clearly, someone needs to dive in and update the definition a bit cuz this one’s a bit dated, especially that part about “making agreements between people so they can live together.” I actually laughed out loud. How 1980’s is that? So cute. So funny. Come on Wiki crowd let’s get that updated.

Sadly, it seems we’ve reached the point where we care more about how problems should be solved rather than if they’re solved at all. Today, a solution is not a solution unless it fits with my perception of reality; my sense of value and what best serves my interest. Pardon the broad generalization, but it seems to apply to most of our leaders and a fair percentage of our population. The propagation of polarization has replaced the ideal of living together. The middle ground is gone.

Today, as we continue to ferret out the details of yet another catastrophic event, another forced reminder of a major societal chasm with no apparent bridge, our leaders, once again, are co-mingling expressions of sorrow with political posturing. They’re giving inane interviews and hosting those surreal, caricature-like, post-tragedy news conferences attended by every nearby politician or wannabe that can elbow their way onto the stage to become part of the spectacle. And, in the flood of hackneyed platitudes and ass covering flowing from their mouths, absent are words like “we have to find a way to address this no matter what that means…everything is on the table…no sacred cows.” Surely one of them must have said something like that, right - law of averages and all? I guess I just missed it. Unfortunately, solution is no longer part of the political vernacular.

A Quick, But Important Disclaimer…

Now, before I go any further I want to make something clear. I am not espousing the views of one side over another because, frankly, at this point I find the whole process of taking sides sickening and counterproductive. It’s akin to a group facing an immediate existential crisis but stopping to debate whether coffee or tea should be served at the meeting to address it, or if attendees should wear business suits or business casual attire. Sandwiches or salads? You get the picture. Images of Nero, a violin, and a toasty Rome come to mind. On this score I have become an equally offended. I’ve grown to hate both sides.

I remember thinking after the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre in 2012 that if the reality of that tragedy, the excruciating grief of inconsolable parents, the nightmarish images of an unfathomable act, didn’t force a suspension of politics as usual in favor of hard solutions, nothing would. And now, 10-years later… Here. We. Are. The process continues. And there it is. The real business of our leaders.

Process is Everything…

Solutions to real problems are hard. They can be painful because they almost always require compromise - a setting aside of black and white in favor of many shades of gray; a measure of empathy and selflessness where the greater good becomes the object over personal gain. They require imagination unencumbered by politics, bias, and zip codes. Oh, and one more…a desire to actually move from process to solution. That may be the toughest challenge of all. You see, some of us, especially politicians, love process. It’s big business. Process includes the choosing of sides and the vilifying of an “enemy.” It comes with some really cool benefits like the opening of the fundraising floodgates, and it greatly simplifies and minimizes the actual work they have to do in representing their constituencies and “leading” the country. Find a solution to any one of the major issues of the day and the run comes to an end. New “causes” have to be found. A new narrative created with new speeches and talking points. Passions re-stoked and lost campaign dollars replaced. It’s a whole starting over thing. So costly, time consuming and downright exhausting. Long live process. Now where did I put that violin?

Where Journalism Comes In…

Ok, let’s get this runaway train back on a more familiar track. We’ve talked about the need to dial up the “serious factor” in journalism by a power of 10 or more. To educate, and empower reporters, researchers, and producers to dig for the truth, wherever it may live. Let’s add a new line to that familiar conversation. Using that discovered truth, news organizations need to become way more solution oriented, providing possible alternatives to the loggerheads we’re currently confronted by. Or, at the very least, light up the paths that can lead our communities to make those discoveries. Too often our reporting has been little more than a soapbox for competing agendas and mouthpieces that are motivated by selfish or even more sinister ambitions. The days of simply letting politicians or officials wax this way or that about what they believe, or taking their word as any kind of gospel, needs to come to an end. We need to find true, independent experts who have no axe to grind, no agenda to service, whose sole mission, like ours, will be finding solutions. They’re out there. You just have to put the effort in to find them.

Be Wary The Eager ‘Expert’…

There’s a great podcast, “Against the Rules,” hosted by Michael Lewis of “Moneyball” fame, that dedicated its third season to experts. The first episode offers reasons why, when looking for one, you should always start “six levels down from the top” because those are the people who really have the expertise, the new ideas and the know-how to implement them. They rarely have an agenda beyond just getting the job done. They care about solutions way more than process. They’re hard to find because the level six types never volunteer to become famous. You have to find them and drag them in front of the microphone or camera. Other episodes discuss “expert creep” and how so many of the people we see on TV or read quotes from in stories don’t actually have a specific expertise in the topic they’re commenting on. More of an “in the ballpark” understanding that leads to misinformation or worse. It’s time to spend the time and dig. Find the real experts with unadulterated motives. Drag them out of their basement offices and pick their brains.

I’m Not Suggesting…

It’s not realistic to think that any individual news organization is going to find solutions to issues like gun control…or not, abortion…or not. They can, however, take a solution based approach to address relevant issues in their communities, and in doing so, encourage audiences to recognize the futility of the current visceral, button-pushing manipulation they’re victims of and lean more towards independent critical thinking. Our current plight demands someone take a shot and the fourth estate, though wounded and weakened, seems like our only hope.

Wait, Wait…Maybe I am (Suggesting)…

ProPublica is living proof that it doesn’t take a monolithic giant to create real change on a global level. The non-profit news organization employes about 100 journalists and has dedicated its existence to digging for truth. ProPublica’s investigations know no borders. They are a true David in a world of bad guy Goliaths.

(From their About Page) ProPublica was founded in 2007-2008 with the belief that investigative journalism is critical to our democracy. Our?staff remains dedicated to carrying forward the important work of exposing corruption, informing the public about complex issues, and using the power of investigative journalism to spur reform.

Without a lot of fanfare, ProPublica’s work has created real change. They’ve found solutions to hard problems and called bullshit on governments and corporations too numerous to mention. They’ve been honored repeatedly for excellence in journalism and general righteous bad-assery. We need more just like them which leads to this idea: As broadcasters continue to search for reinvention that will restore relevance, how about creating a national investigative unit to tackle our biggest problems? Imagine if Scripps, Nexstar, and Gray created their versions of ProPublica. Maybe the new TEGNA makes investigative reporting its calling card developing a national investigative brand to go along with its local one. I mean heck, if a small, albeit pretty well funded non-profit can do it…I believe the end result would be a much brighter light - hell any light - at the end of the tunnel we’re currently in. It just might help return process to its rightful place as the means to an actual end instead of the deceptive scam its become in the hands of a cynical group and institution (politics and politicians for those not following along) that’s mightily lost its way.

Solutions are hard and sometimes very expensive but sometimes there are greater considerations that make finding them necessary. It’s time for some organization, or better yet a full industry, to step up for the sake of our country. The future may just depend upon it.

Meet Jane McGonigal…

Ever heard of her? Yeah, me neither, but she is a crowning example of how true experts combined with great journalism can be a path to salvation. I learned about Jane yesterday on another podcast (increasingly becoming my absolute favorite information medium), this one “The Next Big Idea,” hosted by Rufus Griscom. Jane is a futurist and video game designer who, in 2010, created and executed a wide-scale simulation to study the potential ramifications of a global pandemic. A global pandemic emanating from China. A global pandemic caused by a respiratory-based virus. The results were eerily identical to the realities we ultimately experienced with the actual COVID pandemic.

I had never hear of Jane before the podcast and I’m quite sure, during all the lock downs and social distancing chaos I never saw her interviewed about the results of her simulation. I so wish I had. It would have brought perspective, context, and a glimpse into predictive outcomes, that would have been so incredibly beneficial to us all. Let’s spend the time to find the Jane McGonigals among us.