Art of The Musicians' Brawl by Georges de La Tour | How Does Social Media Affect Religion? | What Does Civil Discourse Mean?

Why Tone Still Matters

Are we becoming what we consume in media? Influencers and opinionators now deeply shape personal beliefs and attitudes, causing a loss of complexity, promoting cynicism, and highlighting the need for civility and peacemaking.

While reading a post by a popular blogger, I suddenly found myself wondering whether I was becoming like this person. 

This concerned me. While I greatly admired this writer’s sharp analysis and detached method of delivery, I didn’t get the sense that this person was, well, happy. And I noticed that as I consistently consumed their writing, I was not just learning their opinions, I was also adopting their values and attitudes.

When I consciously tuned into how this writing made me feel, I realized it communicated much more than the explicit meaning.  Lurking below the genuinely useful insights, there was also a great deal of cynicism, skepticism, contempt, and anger, and this was starting to influence how I saw the world and the people around me.

Of course, we can’t eliminate the implicit transmission of a writer’s values and attitudes, but it’s worth noting how that transmission has changed in both extent and frequency. There has never been a time when so many people with no real relationship to us can reach so deeply into our personal lives and shape our internal landscapes.

We risk being programmed.

When I was growing up, the publication process greatly limited the scope and reach of any one person’s views. The nice thing about a traditional book or magazine is that it generally confines itself to a set topic, and after you put it down, it then has to compete with all your other real-life experiences, interests, and relationships.

Social media has drastically changed this. Now, every pundit and influencer can engage with every issue at any time in a stream-of-conscious fashion. By absorbing a stranger’s thoughts in this manner, without reprieve or mediation, we risk being programmed rather than simply being informed.

Further complicating things is the fact that no one can possibly be sufficiently expert or informed to comment authoritatively on such a vast array of problems and issues. To compensate, opinionators often simply use their much narrower area of focus—say, psychology, capitalism, race, or religion—as the lens for interpreting a broad range of complex problems and events. This lens allows them to filter out any information that can’t be understood through that area of focus, even if that information is critical. 

This not only produces a cacophony of shallow, narrow takes that are too simplistic to resolve real-life challenges. It also trains those who regularly consume this kind of thinking to ruminate over a limited number of problems from a limited perspective.  Among other things, this has the effect of heightening moral outrage while at the same time reducing our ability to cope and problem-solve. 

A world that was once complex, beautiful, and interesting becomes gloomy, predictable, and small. Everything is bad, and it all boils down to liberalism or religion or racism or sexism or progressivism or fascism, etc. Chesterton put it this way in Orthodoxy

A small circle is quite as infinite as a large circle; but, though it is quite as infinite, it is not so large … I admit that your explanation explains a great deal; but what a great deal it leaves out! Are there no other stories in the world except yours …?

Peacemaking as protection. Some of the resolutions of this angst may be simpler than we realize. In April, President Russell M. Nelson called on Latter-day Saints and others to be peacemakers. A year earlier, Elder Neil A. Anderson of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles said, “The Lord taught how to live, then and now, in a contemptuous world”—citing the famous teaching, “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God.”

“By the shield of our faith in Jesus Christ,” Elder Anderson added, “we become peacemakers, quenching—meaning to calm, cool, or extinguish—all the fiery darts of the adversary.”

Notice that peacemaking here is not simply forbearing for the sake of others. It’s also a protection for us from a contemptuous world and fiery darts. 

Some chafe at calls for civility because they believe it excuses errors, makes way for those with bad intentions, or distracts from the substance of an argument. In this view, peacemaking is an observance of niceties—a generous but fundamentally unnecessary act of self-restraint or tolerance. 

Yet to actually be a peacemaker and to engage with real civility are not just matters of decorum that can be separated from the substance. How we treat others reveals what we consider to be of real substance. It also makes us less susceptible to unwanted influence. 

One of my friends in college was a rower. She had incredible posture, and the muscles in her upper arms and shoulders were very defined. Our bodies respond to the work that we habitually ask them to do, and over time, they change in ways that make that work easier.

The heart attenuated by cruelty is more susceptible to falsehood.

The same is also true of our minds. The way we engage with media content and other people strengthens certain mental and emotional muscles. Not only does this affect how we feel in the moment, but it also develops skills, capacities, and a kind of “muscle memory” that will influence how we interpret and handle future events.

Whatever it is you are arguing or defending, if you do it with mockery, criticism, and contempt, then you still become someone who is critical and habituated to hurting other people. Using truth to justify contention or cruelty doesn’t make one a warrior for good; it makes them a clown in Satan’s outrage circus. The heart attenuated by cruelty is more susceptible to falsehood, not less.

On the other hand, heeding the prophetic call to “build, lift, encourage, persuade, and inspire—no matter how difficult the situation” is to believe that there is real good in other people and the world and that it’s worth saving.  In this way, peacemaking becomes a bulwark against the nihilism of the opinion pageant, where truth is a means to status and power. 

Instead of only asking ourselves about the beliefs of media voices we consume, we should also ask ourselves what mental and emotional habits they ask us to practice. Does interacting with this person’s ideas strengthen my fault-finding? To see flaws in others and their words? Do I find myself habitually aggrieved or outraged? Do they invite me to take pleasure in someone else’s failings or to delight in tragedies that confirm my prejudices? Am I developing a greater capacity for defensiveness and suspicion? To demand others capitulate to my wants and needs?

Alternatively, which voices encourage me to practice lifting and building? To laugh with genuine mirth or to feel wonder and awe? To be merciful, warm, and delighted by beauty? To relish the truth and have the courage to reconcile myself to it? To be humble and grateful and, thereby, discover a world filled with love and grace.

Being a peacemaker is more than something we do, though it certainly requires doing. Engaging in peacemaking is also teaching ourselves to see, love, and nurture the things we want to endure forever.

About the author

Meagan Kohler

Meagan Kohler is a Latter-day Saint wife, boy mom, writer, and occasional philosopher. She also writes on Substack at Mirabile Dictu.
On Key

You Might Also Like

When Did We Stop Trusting the Media? A Review of “September 5”

When did we begin to lose trust in the news media? There are plenty of theories. Some suggest March 6, 1981, Walter Cronkite’s last broadcast. Others suggest it was the coverage of President Bill Clinton’s perjury and impeachment. Others suggest it was the advent of 24-hour news stations. The newest film from Paramount Pictures suggests another option in its title, “September 5.” September 5, 1972, is the day that the Black Sabbath militant group kidnapped Israeli Olympic athletes. In total, eleven Israelis were killed. But according to the journalists at the center of the movie, none of that was nearly as important as making sure the “ABC” logo was on the TV screen while the coverage went on. A brief epilogue about how the incident turned out ends with these eerie words, “900 million people watched.”  “September 5” is interesting because, in a movie presumably about the attacks, we see none of it ourselves except through camera lenses and TV screens. It’s not a movie about the attacks at all; it’s a movie about watching the attacks. The film opens as Geoff takes over the control room for ABC Sports. He’s running the night shift, when word comes in about the attacks.  The ABC studios are yards from where the attacks are happening. So they rush Peter Jennings into the Olympic village, and put their own studio camera on top of the building so they can keep a camera on the room where the hostages are being held at all times. Geoff wakes up his bosses, Marvin and Roone, who often debate the relative merits of their decisions, such as whether to turn the story over to ABC News rather than the sports division or whether or not to call the attackers “terrorists.” These compelling arguments make for thoughtful viewing. Ben Chaplin, who plays Roone, an American Jew, does particularly good acting work as he tries to find a nugget of morality in what they are doing.  But every argument ends with the decision being made that will best help ratings and ABC. No matter how many times they argue about good practices, such as waiting for a second confirmation that the hostages were all safe before reporting, the better angels of our trio of decision-makers always lose.  By the way, the hostages weren’t safe, ABC did get the story wrong because they were relying on German state news, and Germany was trying to look safe and less militaristic in their first major international attention since the end of WWII. But for a moment, when the station thought the hostages were safe, their only concern was getting them in the studio for interviews.  Marvin Bader tries to use the language of “the story” as though his audience deserved to have “the story” in real-time. And no matter what decision they made it was in pursuit of capturing the story. But this justification rang shallow as the movie moved on. When the German police burst in to get them to stop telecasting their rescue attempts live because the militants were watching, they stopped to get them to put their guns down, but turned the feed back on nearly as soon as they had left. All of this makes this an engaging movie that is worth watching. When journalists are the main characters, we expect them to be the good guys. “All the President’s Men,” “Spotlight,” “The Post.” Even the film “Shattered Glass” about a dishonest journalist, spends more time highlighting the good journalists who caught him. “September 5” doesn’t offer the media such a convenient way out. By making its characters clear-headed and conflicted, they are more than simple villains. They are exactly what the pressure of studio news would naturally produce. There are real powerful forces driving the decisions of the news industry that are at odds with what is right or good, and all too often, there’s nothing we can do about it. If we are curious about how the spiral of trust began, this film serves as a worthwhile primer while being entertaining as all get out. The film is rated R. It is thematically tough, dealing with questions like whether to broadcast an execution live, but none of the violence of the incident is actually seen the movie. In terms of a ratings feel, I might compare it to the film “Gravity” while using the word “f***” three more times than is allowed in a PG-13 film. I wouldn’t recommend this for young children or young teens, but the themes about how media manipulates us would be important for older teens, and I might consider watching this film with my kids once they turn 15 or so.  If I did, I’d ask them questions about the nature of journalism. Is getting the story more important than the lives of the kidnapped Olympic team? Do we need to know about what’s happening in real-time on the other side of the world? How has constant news coverage made the world a better or worse place? What motivates those who choose what to show on the news, and how they tell those stories? Four out of Five Stars. September 5 has already had a limited release, and it is rolling out in individual markets across the country through January. 

Living in This Strange New World

A modern new doctrine of self is at the core of cultural shifts challenging Christians today—all the more reason for disciples of Jesus to amplify their witness of God and human identity with the world.

Sean Penn models … civility?

Actor and activist Sean Penn can certainly never be faulted for the passion or sincerity of his convictions. Much the same could be said for entertainment commentator Sean Hannity. But civility is hardly a word often associated with either. So I wanted to point out an important conversation between the two Seans that occurred last night on Fox News. Hannity had learned that Penn was filming a documentary in Ukraine when the conflict began. And reached out for an interview, and while Penn started the interview by telling Hannity that he didn’t trust him. But Penn eventually discusses how as an American he has a luxury “to indulge my lack of trust, which it becomes a petty thing.” But that witnessing the resistance of the Ukrainian people he noted that they didn’t have that luxury. The two merely agreed to disagree about the role President Biden has played in the conflict, and focused instead on their shared commitment to the good of the people of Ukraine. While it might be sad that a simple civil conversation is worthy of note, the reality is that this level of discourse is something which we would do well to aspire to more often. Perhaps it’s good we are gaining the perspective to see it.

Subscribe To Our Weekly Newsletter

Stay up to date on the intersection of faith in the public square.

You have Successfully Subscribed!

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This