Communication Podcast Discussion

 

There are a lot of communication podcasts to choose from and while I listened to several, I ultimately decided to use the first one that popped up in my Google search. It’s called the Communication Guys Podcast, and it is hosted by Tim Downs and Dr. Tom Barrett, both with extensive backgrounds in communication. It’s important to note that the most recent podcast is from October 12, 2021, with virtually no content released throughout 2020. It’s unclear whether this podcast is still in active development. However, the title of this most recent podcast is How to Connect with an Angry World. I cannot think of a better tie into the class material than a podcast dedicated to delving into the communicating in an increasingly polarized world. What makes this episode particularly poignant is the early acknowledgement that this podcast was originally recorded and released several years before. In a new introduction the hosts explain that this is even more important today than it was when it was initially released. I happen to agree.

 This podcast immediately delves into the necessity of recognizing online filter bubbles and their corollary, ideological echo chambers (Downs and Barrett, 2021, 01:37). Tim points out how confirmation bias reinforces these beliefs (Downs and Barrett,2021,02:24); more importantly it facilitates these beliefs. To expand on this, I would argue that when confronted with someone who holds an opposing ideology our tendency is to project all of our perceptions of the values of that ideology. This not only precludes that person’s individuality, but also any nuanced discussion or middle ground. Stereotyping or reducing someone’s ideas to a convenient label also has a way of dehumanizing them, further undermining any need to find middle ground or an acceptable form of communication. This line of thinking seems to match the podcast as both hosts argue that we must distinguish individual from belief in order to minimize conflict (Downs and Barrett, 2021, 04:36). It’s easy to jump to a conclusion that someone else is “stupid” because it’s inconceivable (to you) for them to hold a certain position. Life experiences vary from person to person (your mileage may vary), and implicit truth to one person is a rejection of reality to another. Failing to recognize this process can result in a mental process called “villainizing” (Downs and Barrett, 2021, 06:57).

This idea also indirectly builds on the concepts presented in the Agenda-Setting Theory introduced this week. When communicating with people with different values and ideas, it may be necessary to attempt to correct for biases that stem from their personal information consumption. Understanding what media someone consumes and how they consume it provides you with a potential way to bridge information gaps.  It is even more useful to apply this same line of thinking to yourself. What kind of media shapes how you think, act, or speak? How can you attempt to correct for your own biases or experiences? I do not believe we can come to understand other people if we do not apply those same considerations to ourselves. Despite this, it’s important to avoid projecting your experiences onto others because they are individuals with a broad spectrum of experiences. Often, experiences that will be forever beyond your reach.

 Link to the podcast: https://www.communicationguys.com/podcast/

Downs, T., & Barrett, T. (Hosts). (2021, October 12). How to Connect in an Angry World (No. 174) [Audio podcast episode]. In Communication Guys. https://www.communicationguys.com/podcast/