We’re all aware of some version of the problem: It’s not just that we can’t agree, it’s that we can’t even have the conversation.

You know what I’m talking about. In a way, it’s difficult to articulate–hard to find the right words to explain. You say something and I’m immediately sent spinning. I say something and you have a fact to refute it.

You’re suspicious. So am I. We’ve both heard things and have facts and sources. We both have premises. We both know a lot of stuff. Over and over, we keep having conversations that never get off the ground.

Even though we’re still connected, we know those who’ve separated from friends and family.

So let’s try something different, something kind of simple–if we’ll give it a chance..

Let’s watch the news together.

Yes, this is an invitation. In these COVID times, we don’t have to be in the same room. Let’s get on the old horn, settle down, and watch the news. Let’s flip the channels and land on one. You tell me what you see. I’ll tell you what I see. You tell me what you hear. I’ll tell you what I hear.

Then we’ll flip to another channel. You can pick the first channel. I’ll pick the second. Repeat.

Let’s present our experience to each other so we start to understand not so much what each other thinks–which all of us may be too eager to volunteer lately–but try to understand how each other sees the world.

I need to understand that if I’m asking this of you, I have to hold up my end. I can’t immediately swoop in if I hear something I don’t like. I can’t sit, ready to pounce on the perceived weakness (when you think about it, it’s amazing how many of the metaphors for these types of behaviors draw from images of hunting/attacking animals) of your argument.

Basically, I have to shut my mouth for a minute and hear what you have to say, but over the specific medium of watching the news together. So we’re freeing each other of bickering about data points and generalized conspiracies. We’re watching images on the screen and listening to the words that accompany them, and we say, “I see this. I hear this.”

We have come a long way, so we probably won’t end up agreeing. I don’t want us to argue, but we may start arguing a bit. Perhaps that’s okay, but let’s just not finish that way.

Because if we can’t even do this simple thing, take a few minutes and watch TV together, then all hope for discourse really is lost, isn’t it?

Part of me envisions a scenario in which we don’t even weigh in on each other’s comments. We listen, take our turn, and eventually turn the TV off and take conversation elsewhere, maybe to why we’ve been friends in the first place.

Then we can hang up for now.

• Author Bio
• Latest Posts

Scott Warnock

Scott Warnock is a writer and teacher who lives in South Jersey. He is a professor of English at Drexel University, where he is also the Associate Dean of Undergraduate Education in the College of Arts and Sciences. Father of three and husband of one, Scott is president of a local high school education foundation and spent many years coaching youth sports.

Latest posts by Scott Warnock (Posts)

• An Eagle’s farewell: Nothing artificial about it - March 29, 2024
• Friends of all ages - March 6, 2024
• AI overlord inevitability?: My fantasy team says no - January 19, 2024
• Three-volley salute–and fathers and sons - December 18, 2023
• Trains do not keep a rollin’ - October 21, 2023

Tags: politics & government, virtual children by Scott Warnock // 1 Comment »