Public Discourse Blog (Sheila McQuade)

Scout Finch was one lucky little girl.  The wisdom bestowed upon her by Atticus surely helped her navigate through some very trying times. But Scout and her brother Jem aren’t the only people to learn from Atticus’ advice and life lessons.  Anyone who reads To Kill a Mockingbird learns the importance of one of life’s most valuable soft skills: empathy, the ability to understand and share the feelings and emotions of others. My job as a high school English teacher entails working with students to become better communicators through reading, writing, speaking, and listening.  But studying and discussing literature can do so much more. It’s vital that young people today develop empathy towards others in order to combat the polarization, discrimination, and intolerance currently at play in society.  The study of literature and the lessons it imparts can help build empathy in our leaders of tomorrow. Recent studies on empathy have shown alarming results.  For example, a University

Hi all, I received a timely email from my school's media specialist yesterday concerning fake news. If you'd like some tips on spotting fake news, you may want to check out these out handouts.  Here's his message: Here is a link to some handouts concerning fake news from the School of Information Sciences at the University of Illinois. Handouts include a list of fact checking websites and fake news spotting tips from the following organizations: On the Media Global Digital Citizen The International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions The News Literacy Project Web Link Fake News Handouts http://media.ischool.illinois.edu/dl/events/fake_news_handout.pdf

I am recommending that large, diverse high schools restructure into small College and Career Academies to better serve the needs of all students.  Some students are better off learning a trade as they prepare to enter the job market.  

The rise of the “newer formats” was followed by the 2000 presidential election, so the environment was ripe for a more extreme political polarization to infect the country. It does seem like there has been a loss of mutual respect between opposing ideologies along with a reluctance to engage in civil discourse over pressing issues of the day. The word “compromise” has been forgotten by so many political pundits, and that has seemed to rub off on audiences.  When both sides are always in attack mode while simultaneously digging in their heels to promote their own agenda, it would appear unlikely that any real progress may be made.  With that being said, I do believe that this kind of programming has engaged a greater number of people, which can be good for democracy.  The entertainment value of the shows may be what initially increased viewership, but the result is more people watching and therefore learning about current affairs.  Certainly that can be considered a positive step

Regardless of the issue being discussed, it sure seems like Economics and Political Science have been the most thoroughly represented disciplines in the media, at least since 2008 and the Great Recession. It’s hard to blame the media for such a focus because it seems like that’s what most viewers want to hear about.  Of course the financial health of the country and its citizens will always be a hot topic, and between the auto industry’s near collapse, the banking/mortgage fiasco, and subsequent high unemployment levels all coinciding with the beginning of Obama’s presidency, the media always had relevant economic news to cover. And since the government became heavily involved in each of those crises, political commentary proved of equal interest.  Add to that the partisan shenanigans that exploded with Obama’s presidency, which have shown no signs of slowing down, and the media continues to have persistent political news to cover and analyze by bringing on political intellectuals. I

The first people that come to mind as contemporary public intellectuals are David Brooks and Doris Kearns Goodwin.  Brooks excels in presenting opinions (mainly political) in an enlightened, yet easily understandable way. Brooks consistently provides rational arguments for his opinions, and truly promotes the value of looking at both sides of an issue.  Doris Kearns Goodwin, the noted historian, places current events into historical contexts in a way that is both informative and entertaining. She is so intelligent and articulate, and I always learn something new when hearing her speak. I would also give honorable mentions to Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart, along with Neil deGrasse Tyson. Colbert and Stewart very successfully use satire and humor to promote their views and educate the public.  DeGrasse is at one both brilliant and down to earth.

At the risk of sounding like an elitist, I believe that a health examination of public life and the public sphere in contemporary America—specifically news outlets and social media sites—leads to a disturbing diagnosis: they are both plagued by disease and are in need of serious remedy.   Whether analyzing the diarrhea known as Twitter, the constipation of the dread “comments” section, the high blood pressure of news outlets such as Fox and MSNBC, or the diabetes of the overfed mass of blogs, the productive discourse once propelled by the public sphere has become an infectious zone littered with personal opinions either lacking in background knowledge or influenced by fake news. Perhaps with proper medication and mindful exercise the health of the public sphere will improve, but the participants must first acknowledge their illness and strive for healing. Firstly, can the soundbites of 140 character tweets and similar posts really be considered discourse?   Rather than promoting s