2022-2023

Social Media: How Should We Engage and/or Regulate it, If at All?

In the Spring of 2023, Davidson College’s Deliberative Citizenship Initiative, Digital Studies, Political Science, and Psychology Departments, and Jay Hurt Hub for Innovation and Entrepreneurship hosted a Deliberative Forum on “Social Media: How Should We Engage and/or Regulate it, If at All?” This Deliberative Forum enabled participants to actively engage with this important issue, first by hearing from an online panel of experts with diverse perspectives on the topic, and then by actively deliberating with one another in facilitated small group discussions (either in person or virtually) on how best to engage with and regulate social media (if at all). We have just released the recording of the panel portion of the forum and you can view it now below. Also included below are some photos from the event, the event’s deliberation guide and the event flyer for your reference. Enjoy!

Here is a photo of the in-person audience as they listened to the online panel, moderated by Professor Mark Sample…

And here is one of the several small group discussions that followed the panel discussion…

And here is a video recording of the panel discussion…

Here is the deliberation guide that was distributed to the participants beforehand and was used to guide the small group discussions.

DCI-Social-Media-Deliberation-Guide

Social-Media-Forum-Poster_4.5.23

DCI Co-Hosts Deliberative Forum on Parents and Schools

October 4, 2022 by Graham Bullock

deliberators at the Davidson College 900 room.

On September 29, 2022, the Deliberative Citizenship Initiative, in partnership with Davidson College’s Educational Studies Department and Political Science Department, co-hosted a Deliberative Forum on “Parents and Schools: Who Should Teach our Children about Race, Gender, and Sexuality.” The event included both an expert panel discussion and small group deliberations on the topic.

The DCI selects both locally and nationally relevant topics for its forums that citizens – in the broadest sense of the word – have strongly-held, diverse, and conflicting views on and are highly salient to current and ongoing social and political debates. The topic of this forum certainly fits this description, and the strength of views on the topic were demonstrated by the student protests that were held outside the event. Protesters objected to the inclusion of Dr. Melissa Moschella, an associate professor of philosophy at Catholic University, on the panel due to her views on abortion, race, and transgender issues.

As background, the DCI invites panelists to its Deliberative Forums in order to introduce attendees to diverse perspectives on the topic at hand and provide an opportunity for them to witness good argument and a thoughtful, respectful exchange of reasons between people who may disagree deeply. The DCI does NOT endorse the views of any of the panelists it invites but selects them based on the depth and relevance of their expertise to the topic under discussion.

The DCI is committed to the idea that listening to speakers with whom we disagree does not imply agreement; it suggests a willingness to seek out the truth together and to better understand one another’s perspective as fellow citizens with equal status at the table. Melissa Moschella and Derek Black, the event’s other invited panelist, are two of the most highly-qualified and well-published scholars who can speak to the contentious questions surrounding the role of schools and parents in educating children about social issues.

Given their diverse viewpoints, panelists like Dr. Moschella and Dr. Black may hold views that some citizens reasonably find offensive. The DCI is committed to creating spaces for people to engage with, evaluate, and challenge these positions in a productive and civil manner.

More generally, the DCI is committed to catalyzing creative, broadly-supported solutions to the major social challenges facing our community and society – including racism, sexism, and other forms of injustice – through the process of deliberation across differences.

The video of the event is posted below, and we invite everyone to view the panel discussion, which was moderated by Professor Dan Layman, an associate professor of philosophy at Davidson and a co-convener of the DCI. Dr. Layman asked direct questions of each panelist while also allowing them to follow-up on each other’s points. Their discussion was followed by an hour-long opportunity for attendees to engage with one another on these topics in discussions facilitated by the DCI’s trained facilitators. Periods when we had some technical difficulties (this was our first hybrid in-person/virtual event) and when the discussion was temporarily disrupted by protesters have been edited from the video; all comments from the panelists are still included.

Parents and Schools: Who Should Teach our Children about Race, Gender, and Sexuality

DCI-Parents-and-Schools-Deliberation-Guide_9.26.22

The DCI’s Kickoff Party: An Example of Fun and Meaningful “Labor in Organization”

Teddy Roosevelt, when discussing the duties of an American citizenship, said, “If freedom is worth having, if the right of self-government is a valuable right, then the one and the other must be retained exactly as our forefathers acquired them, by labor, and especially by labor in organization, that is in combination with our fellows who have the same interests and the same principles.”

As of now, it has become increasingly difficult to execute this freedom into meaningful discussion, let along tangible results. Insulation between opposing perspectives seems to have proliferated in society, and the fine line between disagreement and disrespect has blurred considerably.

To combat these increasingly worrisome trends, we must begin, as Roosevelt puts it, through “labor in organization.” To me, the DCI embodies this important work. The objective of the initiative is to foster an environment where individuals can productively disagree, learn about differing perspectives, and, most importantly, humanize one another.

My interest in the democratic health of our country sparked when I took the fittingly named course “Democracy in America.” The course was deliberation based, and it was intriguing to hear my peers’ perspectives on topics as diverse as the increasing threat to populism to steps on how to improve American democracy. This rewarding experience made me a supporter of a deliberative framework, so I happily joined the DCI as a new Fellow when presented the opportunity.

The DCI kickoff event on September 2 was a fun, productive event that I consider having been quite successful. Students were attracted to the event by virtue of pizza and prizes and remained in the event by virtue of compelling discussion. While eating, participants had to work together with their peers at the table to find solutions to “puzzles,” or questions ranging from the lighthearted to pressing political issues.

To illustrate the spectrum of topics discussed, the discourse began with “what is the best type of pet?” and slowly worked its way to “how should the United States deal with the invasion of Ukraine?” and “how can we prevent mass shootings?” It was more informal than the structured deliberations also hosted by the DCI, but successful, nonetheless. The participants especially bought into the question regarding how to prevent mass shootings, and extensive deliberation took place. Everyone at the table, which included nine of us, were able to share their thoughts and ponder the options put in front of us.

The conversation was fun because we were all so invested in it, and despite varying views on the root causes of such a sensitive topic, we were able to come to a consensus. We all agreed that part of the issue was at least due to a lack of accessible care for mental health, so if we could find a way to normalize the discussion of mental health with wellbeing in general that that can lead to a better outcome. Of course, a multifaceted issue such as this requires a multifaceted solution, but to even see some sort of solution derived from an informal deliberation shows the strengths of the process.

While the quality of the conversation is why I primarily consider the kickoff event a success, a subsidiary reason to that is that many people were attracted to future DCI events. Afterwards, multiple people came up to me and asked how they can be a part of the DCI and what future events we will be holding. To see such a response of such enduring interest in the DCI by people who initially came to eat free pizza is a testament to not only the experience of the event, but the enchantment of deliberation.

I am looking forward to partaking in further DCI discussions and learning the art form of deliberation. The DCI provides the tools and frameworks to improve as both an interlocutor and citizen. By working cohesively with people who value free speech and diversity of perspectives, we can begin to improve the democratic health of four little corner of the country.