Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Reaching Americans As Media Consumers – Not Only As Participants – To Improve the Political Environment

People on their phones. ​

In order to achieve scale, many civic efforts must also reach Americans as media consumers, where Americans currently spend much more time.

Getty Images, Xavier Lorenzo

Current efforts to improve how Americans think and feel about those across the political spectrum overwhelmingly rely on participation. Participation usually involves interpersonal interaction, mostly to have dialogues or to collectively work on a project together.

These can be valuable, but in order to achieve scale, many efforts must also reach Americans as media consumers, where Americans currently spend much more time.


This is not some “competition” between approaches. They are actually mutually reinforcing: targeting Americans as media consumers should increase participation, and events that are at least partially videotaped can be used to create content for media consumers. Additionally, this is more of a continuum than a binary distinction, since there are options such as being an attendee at an event or creating content that do not fit neatly in either box.

Americans consume much more media than interact across political divides

The average American spends over 10 hours every single day consuming media, according to Nielsen’s 2023 data.

This is dramatically greater than the time spent interacting with fellow Americans across divides. In the recent study The Connection Opportunity from More in Common, fewer than half of Americans in the past year had done each of the seven activities research inquired about, with someone from a different background than them.

In terms of politics, The Connection Opportunity found somewhat under half of Americans who engaged in an extended conversation or talked about group tensions across politics, all the way down to 15% of Americans who worked to achieve a mutual goal that improved their community.

Target Americans as media consumers to reduce Perception Gaps, in addition to as participants

Efforts to reduce perceived political divides – often called Perception Gaps – in the US must acknowledge what Americans are actually doing with their lives right now, consuming hours and hours of media each day. Approaches to reducing Perception Gaps must lean into changing what Americans see and hear about each other across the political spectrum, targeting the media environment.

It may be uncomfortable to acknowledge how many of us Americans spend our time as media consumers. Yet interventions must acknowledge this reality.

Americans need to see each other across politics in a better and more accurate light, rather than the distorted and sometimes even demonized caricatures currently shown in the media environment. Efforts to reach Americans as media consumers to reduce political divides can include vicarious contact (i.e., seeing those across the political interact well), parasocial contact (i.e., developing one-sided relationships with relatable and respectable characters in the other political party), and correcting all sorts of stereotypical views of those in across politics.

A few organizations are encouraging entertainment media to improve depictions of at least interactions between Republicans and Democrats, including Bridge Entertainment Labs, PopShift, and Resetting the Table.

There also needs to be efforts to correct perverse incentives in news and social media that encourage overly negative portrayals of fellow Americans across politics.

All this said, there should still be efforts to reach Americans as participants, either focused more on dialogue and interpersonal communication (e.g., a Braver Angels workshop), or approaches designed to improve a given situation in a community (e.g., Urban Rural Action’s effort “Uniting for Safe and Strong Communities in South-Central Pennsylvania”).

Reaching Americans as media consumers motivates participation

In fact, efforts to reach Americans as media consumers should motivate participation in these types of activities. Referring once again to More in Common’s Connection Opportunity report, and a summary in The Fulcrum that James wrote, the most substantial reasons Americans give for wanting to correct across divides are “perceived community norms” (increasing interest in connecting) and “intergroup anxiety” (decreasing interest in connecting).

Efforts to reach Americans as media consumers should increase perceived community norms about connecting across the political spectrum. For instance, using the concept of vicarious contact, if Americans see others like themselves positively interacting with those in the other political party, many Americans should be more open to doing this themselves.

These efforts should also reduce intergroup anxiety. We at More Like US have a mnemonic CAST for those in the Arts to develop content to CAST fellow Americans as more Complex, Admirable, Similar, and worthy of Togetherness (good conversation partners, collaborators, or friends) than currently believed. This is designed to reduce distorted thinking of those across politics that can increase anxiety to engage across political differences.

To really emphasize how CAST can reduce intergroup anxiety, think of the opposites of CAST. Many would have a great deal of anxiety if they think of interacting with someone who they see as likely stereotypical (rather than Complex), cognitively and morally inferior (rather than Admirable or at least respectable in some ways), totally different (rather than having some Similarity), and as basically worthy of avoidance (rather than worthy of various forms of Togetherness).

Additionally, events with participants provide content for media consumers

The reverse is also true in this mutually-beneficial relationship: more events with participants lead to more potential content that can be created for media consumers.

Some of this work has already been done. Examples include the Braver Angels: Reuniting America documentary about a Braver Angels Red / Blue workshop, and Builders’ The Tennessee 11 documentary about a group of 11 Tennessee collectively developing shared gun control / rights policies. Shorter content includes a 7-minute video about a citizens assembly in Deschutes County, Oregon. Even shorter content suitable for social media such as Instagram or TikTok is also possible.

Benefits and drawbacks of both media consumer and participant approaches

It needs to be clear that efforts to reduce perceived political divides should not devolve into a ridiculous battle between reaching Americans as media consumers “versus” reaching Americans as participants. This said, one must recognize some benefits and drawbacks of each.

Media consumer approaches offer much greater possibility for scale, in a country of over 340 million residents. Messages and relevant data showing similarities can come from all sorts of sources in the media environment, including entertainment, political leaders, athletes, religious leaders, schools and higher education, journalism, etc. More Like US focuses on doing just this. Similar to an advertising model, it is possible to reach people multiple times with messages and content that eventually get remembered and absorbed. It is a model that relies on repetition and breadth.

Even if events could reach 1,000 Americans each day, it would take over 400 years to reach all who voted in the 2024 election – a single time.

A single participant experience likely will be more impactful than a single piece of content seen. Many will likely remember and feel it more, increasing the impact from a single event.

This said, many Americans will not have the time, interest, or energy to participate in any event, let alone repeated events. There are also limits on how many events can be hosted.

A continuum rather than a binary between media consumer and participant approaches

In addition to roles of “media consumer” and “participant,” there are opportunities such as being an attendee at an event or creating media content. These opportunities do not neatly map onto a media consumer vs. participant binary, so thinking about the roles Americans can play much better maps onto something like a continuum, rather than a binary distinction.

Being an attendee at an event involves receiving content, but one has to take a much more proactive step than looking at a screen. A content creator is in a way “participating” quite intensively, but not necessarily in an interpersonal way.

Nevertheless, many Americans will only be media consumers, since all these other options require substantial effort. Americans who lead busy lives trying to make a living and taking care of kids or other loved ones cannot all be expected to make very active efforts.

Conclusion: Target Americans as media consumers, without ignoring other options

Maybe in the future, America will be so bustling with community-driven associational life and sufficient support (e.g., childcare, elder care) that participant experiences alone will be enough. But until this future comes to pass, it is necessary to reach people where they are today, as media consumers watching and absorbing content for hours each day. This is in addition to opportunities for those who have the time, interest, and energy for participant approaches.

Luckily, options reinforce each other. Media consumer approaches motivate participation, and participatory events provide underlying content for media consumption.

Let’s have a field reducing perceived political divides that reaches Americans both as media consumers and participants.

James Coan is the co-founder and executive director of More Like US. Coan can be contacted at James@morelikeus.org.

Imre Huss is a current intern at More Like US.

Read More

Entertainment Can Improve How Democrats and Republicans See Each Other

Since the development of American mass media culture in the mid-20th century, numerous examples of entertainment media have tried to improve attitudes towards those who have traditionally held little power.

Getty Images, skynesher

Entertainment Can Improve How Democrats and Republicans See Each Other

Entertainment has been used for decades to improve attitudes toward other groups, both in the U.S. and abroad. One can think of movies like Guess Who's Coming to Dinner, helping change attitudes toward Black Americans, or TV shows like Rosanne, helping humanize the White working class. Efforts internationally show that media can sometimes improve attitudes toward two groups concurrently.

Substantial research shows that Americans now hold overly negative views of those across the political spectrum. Let's now learn from decades of experience using entertainment to improve attitudes of those in other groups—but also from counter-examples that have reinforced stereotypes and whose techniques should generally be avoided—in order to improve attitudes toward fellow Americans across politics. This entertainment can allow Americans across the political spectrum to have more accurate views of each other while realizing that successful cross-ideological friendships and collaborations are possible.

Keep ReadingShow less
Congress Must Not Undermine State Efforts To Regulate AI Harms to Children
Congress Must Not Undermine State Efforts To Regulate AI Harms to Children
Getty Images, Dmytro Betsenko

Congress Must Not Undermine State Efforts To Regulate AI Harms to Children

A cornerstone of conservative philosophy is that policy decisions should generally be left to the states. Apparently, this does not apply when the topic is artificial intelligence (AI).

In the name of promoting innovation, and at the urging of the tech industry, Congress quietly included in a 1,000-page bill a single sentence that has the power to undermine efforts to protect against the dangers of unfettered AI development. The sentence imposes a ten-year ban on state regulation of AI, including prohibiting the enforcement of laws already on the books. This brazen approach crossed the line even for conservative U.S. Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, who remarked, “We have no idea what AI will be capable of in the next 10 years, and giving it free rein and tying states' hands is potentially dangerous.” She’s right. And it is especially dangerous for children.

Keep ReadingShow less
Microphones, podcast set up, podcast studio.

Many people inside and outside of the podcasting world are working to use the medium as a way to promote democracy and civic engagement.

Getty Images, Sergey Mironov

Ben Rhodes on How Podcasts Can Strengthen Democracy

After the 2024 election was deemed the “podcast election,” many people inside and outside of the podcasting world were left wondering how to capitalize on the medium as a way to promote democracy and civic engagement to audiences who are either burned out by or distrustful of traditional or mainstream news sources.

The Democracy Group podcast network has been working through this question since its founding in 2020—long before presidential candidates appeared on some of the most popular podcasts to appeal to specific demographics. Our members recently met in Washington, D.C., for our first convening to learn from each other and from high-profile podcasters like Jessica Tarlov, host of Raging Moderates, and Ben Rhodes, host of Pod Save the World.

Keep ReadingShow less
True Confessions of an AI Flip Flopper
Ai technology, Artificial Intelligence. man using technology smart robot AI, artificial intelligence by enter command prompt for generates something, Futuristic technology transformation.
Getty Images - stock photo

True Confessions of an AI Flip Flopper

A few years ago, I would have agreed with the argument that the most important AI regulatory issue is mitigating the low probability of catastrophic risks. Today, I’d think nearly the opposite. My primary concern is that we will fail to realize the already feasible and significant benefits of AI. What changed and why do I think my own evolution matters?

Discussion of my personal path from a more “safety” oriented perspective to one that some would label as an “accelerationist” view isn’t important because I, Kevin Frazier, have altered my views. The point of walking through my pivot is instead valuable because it may help those unsure of how to think about these critical issues navigate a complex and, increasingly, heated debate. By sharing my own change in thought, I hope others will feel welcomed to do two things: first, reject unproductive, static labels that are misaligned with a dynamic technology; and, second, adjust their own views in light of the wide variety of shifting variables at play when it comes to AI regulation. More generally, I believe that calling myself out for a so-called “flip-flop” may give others more leeway to do so without feeling like they’ve committed some wrong.

Keep ReadingShow less