Lots of good conversations have come up for me in person in the three short weeks I’ve been publishing my thoughts on this pandemic and the media. Some themes have emerged, including but not limited to: mask wearing and the whys behind it, politicizing pandemic responses, and trust—in media, data sources, or leadership.
While I love these conversations, I try very hard to avoid correlating any pandemic response with political parties, because I think that sort of partisan thinking is part of the problem we are facing today: that if you are not of my beliefs, you are wrong.
This simply isn’t true. If you don’t share my beliefs but are willing to share yours with me, we are of the same thinking. We do not have to agree, we have to listen, understand, synthesize. If you don’t share my beliefs, you are a potential wealth of information for me, should you be willing to share what you’re reading, who you’re listening to, and why you’re thinking what you do.
Media, social media particularly, would have you believe that two and only two options exist for handling this pandemic: You’re either going to KILL EVERYONE by running around willy-nilly without masks because you’re definitely 100% an asymptomatic super-spreader, or you’re doing your true American heroic duty by sitting at home collecting a beefed-up unemployment check and finishing Netflix…
Is this really who we decided to be? Why are accepting the caricatures of who we are rather than insisting upon thoughtful, in-depth representations of options, risks, and outcomes?
And is that really possible at scale? Yes. Rather than making beachgoers or—gasp!—bar-hoppers the villains of the pandemic, why are we not considering their viewpoints? And using those perspectives to shape policies that will effectively prevent the spread of the virus, rather than sticking to initial assumptions that may or may not be helpful? Considering the “other” side: why are we sensationalizing stories of death rather than telling ones that humanize people who have gotten Covid-19, releasing them from the horror-story or old-folks tropes into real humans who other humans can connect with in some way?
We don’t have to accept the narratives we’re being given. This isn’t political, but like polarization in politics, creating a narrative that insists as a society that we force people to choose a “side” in this pandemic is forcing a balanced, interested person into decisions she need not make.
In case you missed my rants, I’ll just leave this here:
People make mistakes but the Texas Department of State Health Services aka where we go for our unbiased, state-supported pandemic information is calling COVID-19 a disease. All. Over. Its. Website.
It’s also 2020 and has been since the pandemic started but who am I to nitpick getting the date wrong when YOU GOT THE NATURE OF THE ILLNESS WRONG? Cool virus, bro.
Other convos: Week 18: the wrong convo. Week 17: the convo. Week 16: the rant. <–so we’re clear, there aren’t any before 16. I just ranted to my family and friends, not the internet.
3 comments for “Covid Convo: Polarization | Week 19”