Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Paving the path forward to strengthening democracy

Dictionary entry for "democracy"
Lobro78.Getty Images

Kristina Becvar and David L. Nevins, co-publishers of The Fulcrum, announced recently that effective Jan. 1, Hugo Balta, The Fulcrum’s director of solutions journalism and DEI initiatives, will serve as executive editor. What follows is a message from Balta about his new responsibility.

In the aftermath of this year’s contentious presidential election, it is imperative to heal a democracy fractured by polarization, emphasizing the importance of dialogue, accountability, and inclusive and transparent governance.

Journalism plays a pivotal role in upholding democratic values and ensuring the health of democratic systems. As our country faces complex challenges, the significance of a free and independent press becomes increasingly evident.


The Fulcrum fosters public discourse by providing a platform for diverse voices and opinions. The national news outlet amplifies marginalized perspectives through news articles, opinion pieces and investigative reports, fostering an inclusive dialogue vital for a thriving democracy.

As The Fulcrum’s executive editor, I’m grateful for the opportunity to take a collaborative approach to paving the path forward to a more informed and engaged citizenry, fortifying the foundations of democracy.

A solutions journalism approach to covering democracy (not politics)

While many newsrooms extensively cover politics, there is a lack of focus on democracy itself — the electoral and governmental systems that shape our nation. So, how can we meet this demand, especially after a divisive election year? The answer lies in embracing solutions journalism.

Earlier, I wrote about the concept of solutions journalism, which aims to foster an environment that tackles the challenges faced by our democracy by promoting civic engagement, equity and constructive discourse. By shifting the focus from merely reporting on problems to highlighting responses (to those problems), thought leaders and journalists can contribute to a more informed and empowered populace.

People across the country feel frustrated and disillusioned with U.S. politics and the journalism that reports on it. Coverage in mainstream media often focuses on extremes, poll numbers, accusations and sensational statements. My charge is to captain The Fulcrum in providing people with what they truly desire from news outlets: information that helps them comprehend and navigate the complexities of the world around them.

Complicating The Narrative

Many people's emotions are running high right now. Elections often bring out a wide range of feelings, whether pride and optimism for those who are pleased with the results or disappointment and frustration from those who aren’t. After a long and grueling election season, we need to connect with and not avoid one another.

In times of high conflict, it's common for people to split into two opposing groups and view each other negatively. This can lead to generalizations and name-calling, which often dehumanize the other side and can escalate tensions. A more productive approach is to seek a deeper understanding of the complex factors that contribute to different perspectives. Doing so can help reduce polarization and foster more constructive dialogue.

As a solutions journalism practitioner, I leverage Complicating the Narratives, which helps journalists find new ways to report on controversial issues and polarizing politics. It draws on the experience of experts in conflict mediation. When reporters use these strategies, they listen better, ask more revealing questions, effectively introduce opposing viewpoints and embrace nuance in their reports. They learn to tell more accurate, richer and fuller stories.

Off The Sidelines

Journalists are trained to view their role as chroniclers of history rather than participants in it. This “on the sidelines” approach is rooted in the belief that involvement could compromise their objectivity, potentially positioning them as active participants rather than impartial observers of the situations they are reporting on.

Objectivity proposes that there are two sides to every story. However, there are many perspectives, and the ones most often left out are from marginalized communities whose representation is absent from newsrooms. That is why I subscribe to transparency in the pursuit of truth.

Acknowledging my biases, I surround myself with people who do not share the same experiences, backgrounds and ideologies. We ensure fair and accurate coverage by “getting on the playing field” and engaging in discourse and debate about story coverage, focus, those who tell the stories and those who are heard.

Journalists are tasked with assisting the public in engaging in self-governance in a responsible and informed manner. This responsibility underscores the importance of a free and independent press, recognized as vital to democracy and enshrined in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The founders understood that the success of the American republic's democratic experiment depended on the unrestricted exchange of information and ideas.

While the road to recovery may be challenging, a collective commitment to understanding and cooperation can foster a more resilient and unified democracy.

As The Fulcrum’s executive editor, I am equal to the task of highlighting how journalism contributes to strengthening democracy and its functions and challenges in an ever-evolving media landscape. This function is essential for an informed citizenry, as it allows the public to make educated decisions and engage meaningfully in civic life.

Ultimately, a democracy's strength lies in its ability to adapt, listen and grow in the face of adversity.

Read More

Someone wrapping a gift.

As screens replace toys, childhood is being gamified. What this shift means for parents, play, development, and holiday gift-giving.

Getty Images, Oscar Wong

The Christmas When Toys Died: The Playtime Paradigm Shift Retailers Failed to See Coming

Something is changing this Christmas, and parents everywhere are feeling it. Bedrooms overflow with toys no one touches, while tablets steal the spotlight, pulling children as young as five into digital worlds that retailers are slow to recognize. The shift is quiet but unmistakable, and many parents are left wondering what toy purchases even make sense anymore.

Research shows that higher screen time correlates with significantly lower engagement in other play activities, mainly traditional, physical, unstructured play. It suggests screen-based play is displacing classic play with traditional toys. Families are experiencing in real time what experts increasingly describe as the rise of “gamified childhoods.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Affordability Crisis and AI: Kelso’s Universal Capitalism

Rising costs, AI disruption, and inequality revive interest in Louis Kelso’s “universal capitalism” as a market-based answer to the affordability crisis.

Getty Images, J Studios

Affordability Crisis and AI: Kelso’s Universal Capitalism

“Affordability” over the cost of living has been in the news a lot lately. It’s popping up in political campaigns, from the governor’s races in New Jersey and Virginia to the mayor’s races in New York City and Seattle. President Donald Trump calls the term a “hoax” and a “con job” by Democrats, and it’s true that the inflation rate hasn’t increased much since Trump began his second term in January.

But a number of reports show Americans are struggling with high costs for essentials like food, housing, and utilities, leaving many families feeling financially pinched. Total consumer spending over the Black Friday-Thanksgiving weekend buying binge actually increased this year, but a Salesforce study found that’s because prices were about 7% higher than last year’s blitz. Consumers actually bought 2% fewer items at checkout.

Keep ReadingShow less
Censorship Should Be Obsolete by Now. Why Isn’t It?

US Capital with tech background

Greggory DiSalvo/Getty Images

Censorship Should Be Obsolete by Now. Why Isn’t It?

Techies, activists, and academics were in Paris this month to confront the doom scenario of internet shutdowns, developing creative technology and policy solutions to break out of heavily censored environments. The event– SplinterCon– has previously been held globally, from Brussels to Taiwan. I am on the programme committee and delivered a keynote at the inaugural SplinterCon in Montreal on how internet standards must be better designed for censorship circumvention.

Censorship and digital authoritarianism were exposed in dozens of countries in the recently published Freedom on the Net report. For exampl,e Russia has pledged to provide “sovereign AI,” a strategy that will surely extend its network blocks on “a wide array of social media platforms and messaging applications, urging users to adopt government-approved alternatives.” The UK joined Vietnam, China, and a growing number of states requiring “age verification,” the use of government-issued identification cards, to access internet services, which the report calls “a crisis for online anonymity.”

Keep ReadingShow less
The concept of AI hovering among the public.

Panic-driven legislation—from airline safety to AI bans—often backfires, and evidence must guide policy.

Getty Images, J Studios

Beware of Panic Policies

"As far as human nature is concerned, with panic comes irrationality." This simple statement by Professor Steve Calandrillo and Nolan Anderson has profound implications for public policy. When panic is highest, and demand for reactive policy is greatest, that's exactly when we need our lawmakers to resist the temptation to move fast and ban things. Yet, many state legislators are ignoring this advice amid public outcries about the allegedly widespread and destructive uses of AI. Thankfully, Calandrillo and Anderson have identified a few examples of what I'll call "panic policies" that make clear that proposals forged by frenzy tend not to reflect good public policy.

Let's turn first to a proposal in November of 2001 from the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). For obvious reasons, airline safety was subject to immense public scrutiny at this time. AAP responded with what may sound like a good idea: require all infants to have their own seat and, by extension, their own seat belt on planes. The existing policy permitted parents to simply put their kid--so long as they were under two--on their lap. Essentially, babies flew for free.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) permitted this based on a pretty simple analysis: the risks to young kids without seatbelts on planes were far less than the risks they would face if they were instead traveling by car. Put differently, if parents faced higher prices to travel by air, then they'd turn to the road as the best way to get from A to B. As we all know (perhaps with the exception of the AAP at the time), airline travel is tremendously safer than travel by car. Nevertheless, the AAP forged ahead with its proposal. In fact, it did so despite admitting that they were unsure of whether the higher risks of mortality of children under two in plane crashes were due to the lack of a seat belt or the fact that they're simply fragile.

Keep ReadingShow less