Box 3.1 Public Discourse as Respectful Exchange

Approaching public discourse as respectful exchange has deep classical roots. Professor of rhetoric Takis Poulakos explains that the ancient Greek teacher of rhetoric Isocrates worked to “disassociate rhetoric from its reputation as a tool for individual self-advancement and to associate rhetoric instead with social interactions and civil exchanges among human beings.”^[1] That means we, like Isocrates, can choose how to approach and use rhetoric: for selfish gain or thoughtful exchanges about community issues.

Box 3.2 Qualities of Productive Discourse

From Benjamin R. Barber^[3]

Our additions

When productive discourse is used, you are more likely to actively address public issues and improve your community rather than watch other people fight it out or make policies for you.

Box 3.3 Productive Discourse In Practice

The murder of George Floyd, a Black man, on May 25, 2020, by white Minnesota police officer Derek Chauvin helped spark national conversations over racism, policing, and police reform. Just five months later, in November 2020, Black social media personality Emmanuel Acho posted the video “A Conversation with Police” to his popular YouTube series “Uncomfortable Conversations with a Black Man.”^[4] In the video, Acho talked with four white male members of the Petaluma (California) Police Department about racism and policing. Their conversation illustrated several qualities of productive discourse even as they discussed contentious topics.

The conversation featured inclusiveness by involving a range of officers. While Acho was the only Black person visibly present, the officers themselves represented an array of positions and years of experience—differences Acho made clear when introducing and asking questions to each officer and that officers occasionally referenced (e.g., “I’ve been doing this for thirteen years…”). Acho even invited an officer in the live audience to provide his perspective as a traffic officer. By including this range, the conversation revealed a variety of perspectives among the officers and thus avoided dichotomous thinking: Black people versus “the police.” Instead, “the police” became humanized and differentiated across multiple positions, experiences, and viewpoints.

The conversation also displayed inclusiveness by becoming multidirectional. Acho primarily asked the officers questions, but the officers occasionally asked Acho questions as well. For instance, after Officer Ryan McGreevy answered Acho’s question about whether there is “enough accountability in the police force when mistakes happen,” another officer immediately asked Acho, “What does justice look like to you in these situations?” By enabling all participants to ask questions as desired, the conversation was shaped by more than one person or perspective. It also required all participants to potentially be on the “hot seat” and answer questions, not just ask them. Consequently, the discussion included a greater number of topics, perspectives, and experiences than a strict interview format would have allowed.

In addition, all the participants clearly listened to each other. They appeared to make eye contact and nodded their heads as others spoke. No one cut anyone off, and follow-up comments or questions recognized what was previously said. In one instance, retired Officer John Antonio, for example, asked Acho if Black officers make him as nervous as do white officers. As Acho explained why not, Antonio verified he was hearing Acho correctly. Antonio asked if Acho’s connection with Black people “makes you relax a little bit more or…” That check-in allowed Acho to clarify the distinction he was making so Antonio and all viewers could better understand his perspective.

Finally, several participants displayed provisionality rather than certainty in their positions. For example, traffic officer Nick (no last name provided) explained that his officers approach every person at a traffic stop the same way rather than interact differently with Black people (in recognition that the experience can be very different for them than for white people). But he added, “Maybe we should [approach them differently].” Later in the video, when Officer Greely explained why “defunding the police”—such as by allowing mental health workers, rather than police officers, to respond to mental health crisis calls—does not work when a person is wielding a knife, Acho admitted, “I had not heard it like that before.” Such comments displayed humility and open-mindedness as discussants recognized the merits of each other’s points and the limitations of their own understanding. Such provisionality lent to a productive discussion because participants (and, likely, viewers) better understood and respected each other.