By Rosemary Ford and Caitlin Agnew

This article has been lightly edited for length and clarity.

On this episode of The State We’re In, Melanie Plenda talks with University of New Hampshire grad students, Shantel Palacio, and Nathan Harris, founders of Beyond the Border, a critical dialogue series, and James Rinker, Digital Community Engagement Journalist for The Keene Sentinel, and part of the current cohort of the solutions journalism networks Complicating the Narrative Fellowship, to find out what it takes to have a respectful conversation on a sensitive topic without resorting to shouting and personal attacks.

Melanie Plenda:

So let's start with a question for the three of you. Can you tell viewers a little bit about your projects and what you hope to accomplish with them? Let's start with Shantel. And then to Nathan and James.

Shantel Palacio:

Thank you. So our project is called Beyond the Border, a critical dialogue series, and the goal is essentially to have a New Hampshire based expert engage with their counterparts from beyond the border in a conversation about sometimes controversial topics.

Melanie Plenda:

And Nathan, what would you like to add to that?

Nathan Harris:

I think that says it all. Getting them to engage is the fun part, and then watching it all unfold as it happens.

Melanie Plenda:

And James, how about you?

James Rinker:

So for the next year, I'll be reporting on the lack of resources for gender affirming health care in the state of New Hampshire, which is a state that is already struggling overall, in access to rural health care. The goal is identify possible solutions, and bring more resources to the state while also highlighting the resources that are actually here. At the core of the work that I do with the Sentinel is to help establish trust and transparency in the local news organizations such as the Sentinel, and this fellowship, I'm doing that in terms of debunking misinformation around this recently very polarized and politicized topic, and encouraging others to listen to each other more rather than closing off and that sense of judgment and indignation.

Melanie Plenda:

Absolutely. And so this is also for the three of you, why has it gotten so hard to talk to each other? Does it seem like a skill we need to learn or relearn, especially after the pandemic?

Shantel Palacio:

Yeah, definitely, I think before the pandemic. Some of these topics were difficult to talk about. But during the pandemic, I think we lost our ability or connection to each other. And then there was the racial reckoning that happened. And then it created, I think, more anxiety, particularly, in my experience, racial anxiety, where we want to connect with each other, but we're afraid to say something wrong, or we're afraid of dealing with, you know, kind of microaggressions. 

Melanie Plenda:

And Nathan, anything you want to add to that?

Nathan Harris:

Yeah, I think social media has helped with that a little bit. People can isolate and just send barbs out, not communicate. When you watch teenagers or adults basically have a whole hour conversation, just using their phone, and not ever engaging. We're just not doing what we used to do. So now when you throw a difficult topic matter into the mix, it makes it a little even harder.

Melanie Plenda:

And James, what do you think?

James Rinker:

Yeah, in terms of my work I view it as not the fact that we have gotten harder to talk to each other rather, we've been talking more at each other. Humans really need to be heard before they will listen. And so we don't do nearly enough since the pandemic of listening to each other, especially with these really difficult conversations. And as a result, there's a lot of conflict. That's I mean from that, and not a lot of understanding, well, where are we coming from in these views? Where are we coming from these conversations to begin with the root of why do we resort to these very different sides and immediately close each other off?

Melanie Plenda:

So how do you get past that? And this will be a question for all three of you. How do you get past that in these conversations where it sounds like the goal is not to get everyone to agree, but how do you get people to at least hear each other enough to understand where the other is coming from?

James Rinker:

Yeah, definitely. And so, for me, it's really getting under the surface of their way of thinking. It would be kind of bad if we all agreed on the same thing, all the time. And as humans were meant to have that conflict and different opinions and different interests. When it comes to these conversations, I'm learning more, where these viewpoints are coming from and asking questions like, How has this conflict affected your life? What is oversimplified about this thing that you feel really strongly about? And most importantly, what are the questions they feel that nobody is asking? When it comes to your views when it comes to this topic that you feel really strongly about? And working to also get to the root of, is it because they've been misinformed? Is it because they actually are spreading misinformation and disinformation about this topic? So in my realm, in health care, in gender affirming health care? Is this actual factual information? Or is this actually ‘Oh, this is an experience, this is something that they have lived through that they have heard about’, and learning more from that.

Melanie Plenda:

Interesting and Shantel and Nathan, do you have anything you want to add to that?

Shantel Palacio:

Yeah, absolutely. I think that we just need to have spaces to be able to engage and ask questions, and even make mistakes. The university setting is an academic institution, it's the perfect place to be able to ask questions. So I think folks really need that place to kind of explore and engage in conversations that they've never had before.

Melanie Plenda:

For the three of you. Both projects are focused on sensitive conversations. So what does it mean to you to complicate the narrative or have a critical dialogue? Let's start with James and then to Nathan and Shantel.

James Rinker:

So in terms of my fellowship, specifically, it's rooted in conflict mediation techniques, though complicating the narrative idea came from a scholar, Amanda Ripley, she wrote an essay, and then I now have her book. And it really just talks about this looping framework. So hearing what people are saying to us during the active listening work. And from there kind of looping that back to them of if I'm hearing you correctly, you're this is what you're thinking, this is what you're saying. And really making sure that those active listening skills and putting those into practice and making sure that people know that they're being heard in these conversations, and when it comes to complicating the narrative as well, it's that mediation, making sure that when we're complicating the narrative, we're meaning that we're learning about these different ideas and how they can coexist in this space, and these different viewpoints, and not making this an unsafe space. And making sure that people understand that there's a lot of nuance in any kind of topic that has some people view it as one side versus the other. In my work is just how are all the layers interacting with one another in this topic of conversation?

Melanie Plenda:

Nathan, what is that critical dialogue? What does that mean to you?

Nathan Harris:

Well, we start with trying to with the complication of the narrative and the critical dialogue, we start with a title that we think captures something that they think about. But maybe it might be something different, but it has some complications to it. Like diversity is a dirty word, which is one of the first ones that we did. Because we knew that that word diversity was a trigger word for some people, and it had different narratives around it. So it was complicated. So we start with that narrative. And then we create the space in the tone that James was talking about, that Shantel mentioned. And then we try to get that narrative to flow. And we're looking for those pieces that give us the opposite in the same

Melanie Plenda:

What do you hope attendees take away from this experience? Let's start with James and then to Shantel and Nathan.

James Rinker:

Yeah, so for me in terms of my work, I really just hope that people come from this with just a little bit more information. I am moderating these conversations and I've done a lot of research myself, and these will be co facilitated with other journalists and community leaders throughout the state, and in that route in those communities. We're really hoping that people come from these, just knowing that they sat and listened, that they heard from people in their community that had this different viewpoint and that they felt it was okay, to make mistakes to fumble, because this is an issue that in gender for me healthcare now in the United States, and talking about the topic is met with a lot of just closed off judgment. People are too scared to talk about it in a way that we can come together and just find, where are you coming from from this. And so I really hope people come from my work, and specifically my conversations, whether it's reading the stories or listening to each other in these spaces, to just remember where other people are coming from, and to know that it's okay to have these conversations in their own communities outside of these structured spaces, that they can take this kind of work anywhere.

Melanie Plenda:

Absolutely, and Shantel.

Shantel Palacio:

So we have these conversations around the dinner table with our dean. And we talk about politics, and education, and policy, and all of these things that we're going to cover in CDS. And we want everyone in the room to feel that way. Like they're sitting around a dinner table. And they're talking about these crazy topics, respectfully, and if they hear something new, great. And if you hear something all in a different way, great too.

Nathan Harris:

Every time I go to one of these, I learn something. So I always do have an objective, I would like for the group or people in the group to walk away with one thing that they didn't know, that either surprised them, or it updated their information or something they thought they knew. And typically, in all the ones that we've done, there's always been at least one or two things. So there may be more, but if they walk away with one thing, I personally feel like it was very successful.

Melanie Plenda:

Well, these are great projects and best of luck to all of you on your endeavors, UNH grad students Shantel Palacio and Nathan Harris founders of Beyond the Border, a Critical Dialogue Series, and James Rinker, Digital Community Engagement Journalist for The Keene Sentinel and part of the current cohort of the solutions journalism networks Complicating the Narrative Fellowship. Thank you all so much for joining us today.

The State We’re in a weekly digital public affairs show is produced by NH PBS and The Marlin Fitzwater Center for Communications. It is shared with partners in the Granite State News Collaborative, of which both organizations are members.