With over two years writing “Crosstalk” with RaeLynn Ricarte, the most persistent question we hear from our readers is this: “How on Earth do you guys manage to work together?”
Given that our views are often poles apart — and they are our own views, not inventions expressed for the purpose of argument — it astonishes people that we are able to work closely as “co-editors,” together striving to give readers of the Chronicle a thoughtful, well designed and informative take on the people and news of our community five days a week. (Yes, RaeLynn is now executive editor as well — primarily because of her sweet and generous disposition — but the newsroom dynamic remains the same.)
The mockery and “hyper partisanship” of our current political climate, growing for years and whipped into a froth during the recent election, has widened the gulf between Americans even as the internet and social media serve up “what we want to hear” based on our first or last click, our likes and dislikes, or just our ethnicity or location —interpreted by “algorithms” adopted by various web services and search engines.
As a result, we see only our own reflection.
That RaeLynn and I can disagree on core principles, and still work in partnership, seems strange in this political climate.
To be clear, writing Crosstalk is not without its bumps and frustrations: There are topics I refuse to address, there are arguments and frustrations, sometimes anger and hurt feelings. You can't discuss things that you feel strongly about with someone who opposes your viewpoint without feeling the pain of it at times.
So how does this work?
For myself, I start with the recognition that no object (or truth) looks the same from every viewpoint. It's something I learned as a photographer: A subject framed in a photograph changes with every step to the left or right.
There is no “right” way to see something, no correct angle, but rather an almost infinite number of variations.
Each view, in the physical world, is a true view. Each view, in the political world, is truly seen by the viewer.
RaeLynn's point of reference is very different than my own, but we are both honestly contemplating the subject. I can't assume her view is wrong simply because I disagree with it.
I make no effort to change anyone’s mind. I see things the way I see them, and others are free to do the same. My hope is we will come to understand each other better: And we do.
I understand RaeLynn's views better now than I did when we started, and learned to recognize some of my own (erroneous) assumptions.
The ability to talk about our differences in a civil and honest manner is the difference between a society that works and one that is primed to fail. Such conversations aren't comfortable, and sometimes differences are irreconcilable, but somewhere in the midst of it all you will find a person with human needs and desires.
Here is a question you should ask yourself, the next time Crosstalk gets you hot under the collar: Do you actually know anyone who fits your stereotype of the “other,” be that the tree-hugging, bleeding-heart Communist liberal or the gun-toting, revolution-spouting dim-witted conservative?
Chances are you don't. If you think you do, try taking them out to lunch. You might be surprised at who you find behind the rhetoric.
Fairness, honesty, strength, integrity, commitment, work ethic – those are the things I find behind the politics and opinion: RaeLynn and I may never see eye-to-eye, and will argue some things til we are blue in the face — but I can't think of anyone I'd rather have watching my back.
And most importantly, when she throws things at me she hangs to the right, and I've learned in the past year to duck to the left.
— Mark B. Gibson
Once upon a time a hawk and a dove decided to team up and run a news office together. Although they held completely different viewpoints on life, the duo felt that they could work together without one of them meeting an untimely demise.
Their working relationship wasn’t entirely comfortable, however. The dove was extremely messy and scattered feathers hither and yon about the office — until the hawk threatened bodily harm. At that point the dove would gather up all of his crap from four cubicles and mumble something about needing more space to be creative.
The hawk would watch the dove stack all of the feathers around his desk without getting rid of even one and then point out that everything would be in disarray again the next time there was a breeze.
At that point, the dove would tell the hawk to “shut up” and the hawk would point out that wasn’t a remark that seemed appropriate coming from “the party of tolerance.”
Sometimes the dove, when frustrated with a project, would talk to himself and that worried the hawk, who feared a split personality could drive the dove to dark deeds.
The possibility of some sort of passive-aggressive disorder was evidenced by the dove making snarky remarks to the hawk, or pretending not to listen when she disagreed, and then saying “who me?” when confronted.
After warning the hawk not to “gloat” about the results of the recent general election, the dove made several nasty remarks about the president-elect in the guise of repeating media reports.
That type of behavior was guaranteed to bring a reaction from the hawk, who launched a pencil over the cubicle that separated their desks.
Of course, no harm was done because the dove had learned to duck and cover every time he made an obnoxious remark. The hawk, quick on the draw, had any number of implements at hand that could easily be pitched.
Sometimes, when the hawk and dove agreed on the topic for Crosstalk, the dove’s finished product would have meandered off onto some side path that had nothing to do with the original subject matter.
The hawk was baffled by this behavior but, since it made the dove happy to talk about his childhood experiences and great thoughts, she went along with the program.
When the hawk and dove decided to make their political views public, a sometimes uncomfortable position to be in, they did so to show their readers that people can hold vastly different viewpoints and still get along.
The hawk thought the dove a quirky character with many gifts and talents, including his ability to encapsulate a moment that made the reader laugh, cry or remark on the beauty of the framing.
Most days at the office started for the hawk and dove with a fight over coffee and how to brew it. The dove tended to think “the more the better” and the hawk opted for a hot drink that didn’t eat the lining out of her stomach.
The hawk had also learned when the dove said, “I just made coffee,” it could have been hours earlier. And nothing was worse than pouring a cup of coffee that resembled gray sludge and couldn’t be tasted without a shudder and formation of “pickle lips.”
Interestingly enough, the dove is the keeper of the office razor blades, a job he takes seriously. Out of the kindness of his heart, he offers one to the hawk on days of high stress, but never reveals where they are stashed.
Once in a while, the hawk points out that the razor blades should not be held by the pacifist in the room, but the dove refuses to give up ownership.
That creates no problem for the hawk, a Second Amendment supporter.
The hawk and dove have worked as co-editors for more than two years and developed a fairly smooth work routine.
The hawk has learned that the dove’s point of view is right for his philosopy of life, even if totally wrong for hers. They bridge the gap between them with respect.
— RaeLynn Ricarte
Commented