Lisa Harris shared this slide throughout her presentation for example the viewers that’s most definitely to be open to new concepts or ideas. The audiences on both aspect of the spectrum are entrenched of their views and unlikely to think about new info that doesn’t assist their beliefs. Picture courtesy of Lisa Harris
I lately returned from the annual meeting of the American School of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) in Baltimore — the primary assembly of this skilled group because the Supreme Courtroom’s Dobbs opinion overturned Roe v. Wade.
One of many classes I attended was distinctive in its concentrate on communication methods, and plenty of of its takeaways, with some tweaks, may benefit journalists. Particularly, a few of the session’s key factors might help journalists keep away from polarizing language that will undermine the info we’re offering and the tales we’re telling.
Key takeaways:
- Cowl abortion as a lot as potential as a well being care problem reasonably than a political one (although it’s each).
- Perceive who your viewers is, what their values are, and what they want.
- Lean into nuance and complexity, assuming readers can perceive the grey areas of a difficulty.
- Reveal in your story, or permit sources to disclose, the way it’s potential to carry two opposing concepts in thoughts on the similar time. Present how a difficulty just isn’t black or white however, generally, black and white.
As you may think, a whole lot of the classes on the ACOG convention needed to do with abortion, however not essentially in the best way you may anticipate. It was not a sequence of advocacy classes on coverage or offended rants about what politicians are doing throughout the nation as an increasing number of state legislatures go abortion restrictions. Fairly, almost each session associated to abortion in any method, and even classes about one thing else through which the Dobbs determination or abortion got here up, targeted on care of sufferers.
The assembly was targeted on docs doing what docs do: caring for his or her sufferers and studying and reinforcing the perfect methods of doing that. And that brings me to the session that I discovered notably illuminating for journalists: “Depolarizing Abortion Conversations: Proof-Based mostly Communication Methods for Physicians.”
The session was offered by Lisa Harris, M.D., Ph.D, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology on the College of Michigan whose research ”examines issues on the intersection of scientific obstetrical and gynecological care and regulation, coverage, politics, ethics, historical past, and sociology,” notably together with abortion. If her identify is acquainted, you may bear in mind her talking in the course of the AHCJ 2022 luncheon roundtable in Austin, simply days earlier than the Dobbs determination was leaked.
As its title implies, Harris’s presentation targeted on communication methods physicians can and will use to depoliticize abortion and talk about it for what it’s — a well being care problem. But the methods she shared nonetheless supply some insights for journalism. So I’ll cowl a few of the highlights of her discuss. (AHCJ is within the technique of planning a webinar with Harris through which she’s going to current a few of her analysis findings and communication methods in a retooled presentation explicitly for journalists.)
Abortion is normally a “well being care” problem for “well being” journalists
As well being reporters, our reporting on abortion — even when reporting on coverage — will doubtless higher inform readers if it focuses on the subject as a care problem. The problem is getting our viewers to learn (or hearken to or watch) what we produce with the mindset of abortion as a care problem. It could seem to be we now have no management over that, however as Harris’s presentation confirmed, there are selections we are able to make in our language and presentation of data that may, in actual fact, flip down the quantity on the political points reasonably than turning it up.
“These are methods which can be efficient at depolarizing abortion conversations, and that may assist join the dots between abortion and well being, which promotes significant engagement with audiences,” Harris mentioned. After all, docs have a vested curiosity in depolarizing abortion conversations that journalists don’t essentially share; it’s not our job to depolarize or polarize a difficulty. It’s our job to report info and inform tales. But when folks learn our articles and really feel extra dug into their place, we could also be much less efficient at speaking info.
Understanding viewers wants
Harris made two essential factors about audiences which can be related to journalists. The primary was about easy methods to goal a message: towards the center. As with conversations about vaccines, chatting with individuals who maintain excessive views, whether or not “professional” or “anti,” accomplishes little. Talking to undecided people, or these with extra malleable views, could make a distinction. Though the journalist’s function is to not persuade the viewers of any explicit place (until it’s in an op-ed or private essay), we would inadvertently write our tales in such a method that speaks extra to at least one “aspect” than one other. Holding it in our minds that our major viewers needs to be the broad center (along with these with views on both excessive) might assist keep away from inadvertent bias.
Her second level was to “know your viewers and know what issues most to them to ship your message in a method that resonates with their values.” Once more, journalists don’t have a “message” to impart, however we do wish to impart the data our viewers will discover most related and essential for them to make up their minds about one thing. Realizing their values might help us determine what info and different points of a narrative to prioritize within the story.
Embrace complexity and nuance
One among Harris’s different key factors was my favourite just because, when folks ask what I do in journalism, I usually inform them I “stay within the grays.” I discover that digging into nuance and complexity might help readers make sense of what are, frankly, complicated well being and medical points. Our media setting usually encourages the alternative, so I used to be pleasantly stunned to listen to Harris say that her analysis reveals audiences are literally “craving” tales that transcend easy or neat narratives.
“Lean into nuance and complexity, together with the emotional and moral complexities of abortion,” Harris mentioned. “That is really calming to audiences; they crave it.” What she present in her analysis is that watering down or oversimplifying points frustrates folks. They wish to perceive the difficulty, and so they don’t wish to really feel talked all the way down to or like a difficulty is being glossed over when it’s clear there’s much more to it.
A part of the nuance and complexity includes “holding the stress of opposites,” Harris mentioned. “If we present that we are able to maintain two opposing concepts on the similar time, it gives a mannequin for different folks to do it, and avoids re-entrenching and polarizing feedback.” It’s potential, she mentioned, to acknowledge that abortion includes terminating a life and permitting a affected person and a health care provider to make what they collectively really feel is the perfect determination for that affected person’s well being and wellbeing.
This goes deeper than a cursory inclusion of every “aspect’s” perspective. It includes permitting these views to coexist reasonably than in direct opposition to at least one one other. How we current these views in our tales and body the bigger narrative can have an effect on whether or not our viewers is ready to think about that two seemingly reverse issues may be true on the similar time, and that generally that may be okay.
