S1: It's time for KPBS Midday Edition on today's show. We're talking about extremism , its driving factors and what it means for our democracy. I'm Jade Hindman with conversations that keep you informed , inspired , and make you think. We'll talk with some of the leading voices on extremism. Then we'll hear about a new book that examines extremism and the media. Plus a look at the documentaries project one year after the Public Matters initiative started. That's ahead on Midday Edition. The killing of Charlie Kirk last week underscored the rise of extremism in the U.S. so today we're talking about what radicalized people to violent extremism and what this means for the state of our democracy. Joining me now is Will Carlos. He covers extremism and emerging issues for USA today will welcome.
S2: Thanks for having me on.
S1: Glad to have you also , Brian Levin , founder of the center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at Cal State San Bernardino. Professor , welcome to you.
S2: Thank you.
S1: So will , I'm going to start with you. The headlines about Charlie Kirk's killing have been evolving.
S2:
S3: Clear that this shooting was motivated by.
S2: In a sort of simplistic.
S3: Explanation , far left ideology is what it's looking like. We don't know for sure ,. But what the FBI has told us so far and is and has sort of informed the public , is that this , uh , this individual had a sort of a left leaning grudge , I guess you would say , against Charlie Kirk , who , of course , was a very prominent , uh , very prominent sort of activist on the on the right. So that's what it's looking like at the moment.
S1:
S3: We have a few clues. I mean , for example , it has been reported in the last few days that , uh , that the individual's , uh , romantic partner was transgender. We know that Mr. Kirk has been pretty outspoken about the transgender community. Uh , the shooting occurred right as Mr. Kirk was answering a question about transgender , about shootings by transgender people. I think it's fair to assume that that that that could be a clue as to the motive. Um , and all we know , as I say , is that that that he's sort of been been described as having a leftist ideology , but quite exactly what the motive was. We won't know unless and until he describes that.
S1:
S4: It. It probably is. But let me tell you about the full range of impactors that those of us in the field look at. The first one is you discuss ideological impact , but there's others as well. Psychological distress or some kind of recent trauma that could be associated with it. And the third one is revenge or personal benefit or aggrandizement. And oftentimes one of these is the primary factor. But you can have all three.
S1: Well , and it sounds like there could be a lot of different motives in this case , in a lot of ways , to describe what's happened. And it's one of those things that you just don't know for sure until all the facts come out. But Brian , regardless of the motive in this particular case , political violence is on the rise , though. So talk to me a bit about that.
S4: Oh my gosh. Yes. And in fact USA today will where Will works get an excellent article about a colleague of mine from University of Maryland , which showed that we're far above the extremist incidents this year alone than we were the previous year. My own research shows that we are far above , um , the relatively small number of extremist motivated homicides this year , somewhat over 20 compared to less than about 15 last year. Hmm.
S1: Hmm. Um , you know all that said. Have you found what ? Have you or what have you found ? Rather , you know , to be the driving force behind extremism right now.
S4: Huh ? I'll. I'll tell you one thing that I think is a big deal. If you look at , for instance , just January 1st alone , the New Orleans attack , which killed 14 people , and the Las Vegas attack , both of those assailants appeared to be undergoing psychological distress. And we see this time and time again. Um , so I think , well , it's certainly proper to try and delve into ideology. It's not irrelevant. But I think this is a public health issue that is primary as well. And if we can intervene with people who are doing certain things like weapon acquisition , expressing , uh , routine anger about a particular group or person , uh , as well as some kind of estrangement or withdrawal. These are all things that we need to look at with young people. Indeed , the El Paso killer back in 2019 , his family called authorities to try and prevent him from having from getting a firearm. They said there's nothing we can do. Hmm.
S1: Hmm. So ? So you really would you would describe all of this as a more of a public health crisis.
S4: I think the two go hand in hand. But but what starts out with is some kind of feeling of abandonment , fear and anger and and withdrawal from the communal relationships and institutions which hold us together. So I think there are a lot of people who , um , become angry and dangerous first and then find some kind of ideology , uh , that becomes a community of legitimization and normalization for this kind of aggression. So what I would say is part of the picture is that in the United States today , we're not only so polarized , but we're so aggressive in our discourse , and it's being done at the highest levels. Hmm.
S1: Hmm. And I'm going to dive into that a bit more here in a bit. Will , I know you were kind of in and out. Your signal was in and out , but I think we've got you back now.
S3: Um , you know , this these , these shootings and these attacks are always everybody always tries to define them in very simple linear terms. And , you know , in the experience that I have covering them , which is , you know , going on 20 years now , like that's very seldom the case. Occasionally you will have an attack where someone comes out and says , I'm doing this for this specific reason. And they appear to be sort of , generally speaking , quite sort of well-adjusted and every other element of their lives. But more often , um , you know , these are people who are undergoing some sort of psychological distress and or their , you know , or revenge or some sort of turmoil in their personal life. But to answer your question , what's going on in the country right now , I think is that's very clear is why. And what we have seen at least over the last ten years is that this political violence does tend to be driven by the by the political rhetoric. So , for example , in the first years or in the , in the , in the Biden years , for example , when Biden was president , we saw a lot of violence and a lot of shootings coming from the far right. And essentially , it doesn't take a genius to figure out , you know , that you have people who are enacting political violence because they feel frustrated and they feel like , um , their agenda is not being met. And so they would go out and they would commit that violence. What we have now , and I think what we're seeing , the kind of as a nascent kind of political , I don't want to say movement , but a nascent sort of trend is , is violence from people again , who feel like their worldview , and that their agenda and their ideology is under attack by the current administration. And so they act. Um , so they act and they commit political violence. I think it's it's possibly too soon to say that that's exactly what's happening. But certainly that's that's what the alarm bells are kind of going off in , in the extremism world. And then the people among the people who study this stuff. Okay.
S1: Okay. And I want to get into that more too. But this question is kind of for the both of you , because , Brian , you mentioned the rhetoric that comes from the white House , and so did you will. So , you know , what about it ? What about the language , the language we hear coming from the white House ? You know , from Trump's violent rhetoric about revenge and retribution to FBI Director Kash Patel , who , in response to Charlie Kirk's death , said that he would , quote , see him in Valhalla. You know , to the regular public , that may have just sounded like an odd thing to say. But to white supremacists who often misappropriate Norse , Norse folklore and this mythology. Rather , it's more of a hat tip and dog whistle. So tell me about that. And the impact rhetoric from the highest office has on extremism.
S3: Do you want to take that , Brian ? I mean , you know this subject so.
S4: Well , I was leaving time for you was one of the best in the business , by the way , if I if I can give him a plug on something that works into this , the manosphere , one thing that I think is important , but not not the only thing , is this kind of misogynistic subculture , which then levels up to aggression. But let me let me just tell you some of the research that I've done on this , and it's very interesting. Let's let's take the current president out of it for one second. Okay. When President Obama was running as a candidate , we saw an increase in invective online. And we also saw President Obama be the recipient of nearly four times as many daily threats. In addition , anti-Black hate crime rose almost in lockstep with that. Interestingly enough , listen to this. It rose right before he was nominated. Not not as he was , but right before. And it also peaked , uh , uh , right before he was elected. Uh , now , with respect to this president , listen to this. When he put his Muslim ban proposal up , we found an increase in anti-Muslim hate crimes. That was an additional jump from when we had the San Bernardino terror attacks just five days before. Looking at Charlottesville , that was the third worst month for hate crime up to that time in that decade. And hate crimes peaked not during that weekend , but in the days of and after the very fine people's speech. So we have tons of evidence , uh , of a correlation between high transmitters and hate violence on the street. One last point. George Bush spoke six days after nine over 11 at the Islamic Center about tolerance towards Muslim people and how it was un-American. Hate crimes against Muslims dropped the very next day and never hit the numbers that had existed before. President Bush made that speech.
S3: I would I would add to that as well. And another very clear example of sort of rhetoric leading to violence would be the Walmart shooting in El Paso , which occurred just a couple of days after Trump had made a speech talking about an invasion on the southern border. So and that's been very closely studies studied. And there's , you know , a clear correlation there , I think , between invective and violence. Oddly enough , I think if this trend that we're seeing right now plays out , and I'm talking particularly about a relationship between , um , either people who are transgender themselves or who are close to transgender people and political violence , then we're almost seeing the inverse of that. We're seeing a situation where a population is being vilified and and denigrated by some of the most powerful politicians on the , on , on the planet. And I hate to say it , but it looks like there is increasingly being some sort of backlash from from that community. I will stress that it's too early to say that that's really a solid trend. But , you know , we had a shooting by a transgender individual , just a what was it a week and a half ago ? And that was quickly followed by somebody who has a transgender partner. And so I think that there's there's something going on there. So and that's sort of , again , shows a clear relationship between the invective and the political vitriol and , and what happens in real life violence.
S4: And could I just bootstrap could I just bootstrap on that real quick ? One of the things we saw in the early 70s when one group felt the left out of power. Right ? There was a change with respect to the presidency and the Supreme Court. We saw a decent number of far left terrorist acts , including many bombings. However , I would like to just add one thing. Having having studied this for a long time and looking at homicides , um , over since 2018 , far right slash white supremacists and related motivations were responsible for the most deaths from extremism in the United States this year. It's much more diverse in January 1st , because it was a violent southeast jihadist that killed 14 , made it lean that way. But we have a very diversified , uh , threat spectrum. And aggression is being encouraged online. And when we look at some of the polls , including a PBS poll , showed that , uh , that there are millions of people who believe that violence is a legitimate way to settle disputes. Although the number of people on the right that adhere to that is greater than that on the left , and we have only just recently have had left wing killings , basically starting around 2020. For years before that , there was a quiescent period where we didn't see any at all. Hmm.
S1: Hmm.
S4: But , but but here's the thing. We're we're we're in it. We're in a we're in a different time. So you know people now and just one quick thing with this , um , there was another part of this. And that is if , if this information is true , this person , uh , the suspect was personally impacted by , uh , this backlash against transgender people. And when when you not only have an abstract , for instance , uh , embrace of an ideology that people can get from pulling into an internet rabbit hole. You can also have that amplified if it involves someone in your orbit who appears to be the victim of that kind of backlash. It's a personalized personal benefit of revenge. That was the third type of impact that we talked about earlier. Interesting.
S1: Interesting. You know , I want to bring Southern California in San Diego into the conversation here , because in the past , San Diego has been a hotbed for extremism. So.
S3: But , I mean , I will say that that , um , perhaps relevant to what we're seeing now , uh , I reported last year on a very high profile case in San Diego that was brought against anti-fascists by the local district attorney there. And this was a really precedent setting case. And and it essentially argued that the prosecutors essentially argued that the , the perpetrators who were involved in a brawl between members of the far right and members of the far left , essentially , you know , anti-fascists and people that they called fascists , um , that they were members of a gang , a criminal gang that were involved in a in a criminal enterprise and a criminal conspiracy. And that case was successful. A number of people pled out , but a couple of people ended up in prison as a result of that. Now , I think that that's relevant because if we do see an increase in left wing violence as described as equivalent to or analogous to what Brian described from the 1970s , you can bet that prosecutors around the country are going to be using that San Diego case as a precedent and as a , as a as a blueprint for prosecuting anti-fascists and other left wing groups across the country. So that's a very that's a very clear sort of , uh. San Diego connection as far as what the stats show us in terms of political violence and extremist violence in Southern California. I'll leave that to Brian , because that's his specialty.
S4: Hate crime in San Diego went up after going down. But , uh , in California overall , for instance , uh , there was some issues with data collection. But what I can tell you is we're we're slightly below , uh , records for , for last year. And I think there was an important point that that will made and that is a lot of the violence that we saw kind of evolved or devolved , depending on how you looked at. Look at it. In other words , uh , pre Charlottesville , we saw this kind of build up to confrontations that were at protests but were generally with more imprecise weapons that weren't firearms. And then post Charlottesville , we saw just the , the , the beginning of sometimes more organized , uh , types of , of structures. But still the violence itself was much more narrow. It tended to occur at events , and it tended to be directed against people who were , uh , oftentimes armed right wing folks. So there was kind of this , uh , escalation , but it was limited most times to , uh , to what we saw at these particular conflictual events. And what I'm , what I'm concerned about with the polarization that exists now and the number of people who sincerely feel that they're under threat from institutional conduct , uh , against either them or groups that they affiliate or associate with is going to make , make this , uh , worse. But let's be clear. Within the far left , there is a very decent swath of folks who adhere to Doctor King non-violent approaches. And so there's been a bit of a schism on the on the hard right with , with extremists. Uh , they , they paint themselves in this macho , warrior type , um , uh , image. And that's something that I think is a bridge that Will has covered so well with this manosphere. Not saying everyone in the ministry is going to commit violence , but this kind of aggression and machismo is something that culturally is considered currency in the in those subcultures.
S1: And you know , well , he mentioned your your project because you are working on a project about the manosphere. Tell me a little bit about that. Well , are you there ? We may have lost him , but. Brian.
S5: Brian , I'm sorry , I am here.
S3: I have kind of sketchy internet here. Um , yes. I just a week and a half ago , we released the first episode of Extremely Normal , which is a series of short documentaries from USA today , and it focuses on the manosphere. It focuses on these toxic male influencers like Andrew Tate. And we actually went and talked to a number of young men in Southern California , not far away from San Diego in Fontana , who were influenced by him. And we talk about the sort of repercussions of that. But that is that is a , you know , the manosphere we might do future episodes on , but where the idea is that we're making a series of documentaries , short documentaries , we're looking at essentially extremist or fringe movements that have increasingly become part of the mainstream and part of mainstream American politics. And that's why we called it extremely normal. I'm very proud of it. It's on YouTube. It's on USA today , I hope I hope your listeners check it out.
S1: It sounds so very interesting. We're going to have to leave this conversation here. It was a great one and hopefully one that we can continue. I've been speaking with Will Karlis. He covers extremism and emerging issues for USA today. You can again check out his latest reporting and his recent series about the manosphere on USA TODAY.com will thank you so much.
S3: Thank you. It's always a pleasure. Likewise.
S1: Likewise. And also Brian Levin , founder of the center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at Cal State San Bernardino. Professor , thank you so much , as always.
S4: Thank you. And there's a related book called Man Up by Cynthia miller , Idris , which covers much of the stuff that will so brilliantly covered in this video.
S1: All right. Thanks for the plug. We'll have to circle back to you all later. Thanks again.
S5: Thank you.
S6: Thank you.
S1: Up next , a local USC professor is out with a book that examines the relationship between extremism and media. Stick around. KPBS Midday Edition is back after the break. Welcome back to KPBS midday Edition. I'm Jade Hindman , it's International Day of Democracy , and so far on the show we've been talking about the implications of Charlie Kirk's killing. But we also want to discuss the state of extremism on our democracy at large and the role of our democratic institutions. Well , one San Diego professor has co-authored a book about how American journalism can amplify extremism. Their name is Nick usher , and they're a professor of communication at the University of San Diego. Their book is called Amplifying Extremism Small Town Politicians , media storms , and American Journalism. Professor usher joins me live. Welcome to Midday edition.
S7: Thank you so much for having me.
S1: Glad you're here. So what questions were you trying to answer with this book ? Right.
S7: So , uh , in Illinois in about 2021 , 2022 , there was a politician that was a previously unknown person who went on from 0 to 200%. And within five days of suing Governor Pritzker , um , ended up on Fox News in front of 4 million people because those were the audiences that were being pulled in. So the question we were asking is , how do you go from literally being an unknown to suddenly becoming the face of Republican politics in Illinois ? Mhm.
S1: So what did you find there ? Because I think you're talking about Bailey. Yes. Right.
S7: Right. So the governor.
S1: About that.
S7: And it's an interesting. Right. Because I'm trying to be very careful about not over gambling. Um , so , um , yeah. So one of the things that we found that I was most surprised by was the role that mainstream media played in all of this in particular ? Actually , the AP and the state effort to try to the State Media Association's effort try to to try to rebuild statehouse coverage. So AP stories were actually barely edited and re headlined and used in the Washington Times and then the Washington Examiner and then didn't even need to be rewritten by Gateway Pundit or Breitbart or the Daily Caller , which are all sort of right wing to right leaning digital first outlets. So the AP just in the AP's traditional , he said. She said they said reporting , um , gave enough guts that these right wing outlets didn't need to do anything. The facts were all there , supporting a right leaning argument for the importance of what Darren Bailey had to say. So. I think that's a really powerful lesson.
S1: Um , you say facts.
S7: Absolutely. I mean , I think the thing that was really shocking to me is I didn't find evidence of misinformation , I really didn't. These by just stating the facts. And the thing is , is that it's very easy to dress up radical arguments in , like we use the phrase parental rights , for example , is that , uh , window dressing for a more sinister conversation that's being had. And so what Bailey was using was the language of constitutionalism. And really , what he was doing was opposing the rule of law. And that is deeply concerning. Right. So all you need to know is you need sort of like a whatever the opposite of a dog whistle is. Right ? The window dressing , like trying to make things sound more anodyne than they really are. Um , and so , yeah , they were all facts and it was well articulated And thoughtful , and that makes it harder for journalists to do the work of parsing through the real intentions there.
S1: You argue that the news norms of modern journalism played a role there and continue in so many ways.
S7: Right. And so objectivity one of the in principle right. It does great work to try to keep us focused on the facts. But often the goal to present both sides of the story leads to false balance. Right. So you're giving too much error to a side that actually isn't particularly supported. Right. Just in an effort to be fair. So that's one. Um , the second is novelty. So , you know , the good old man bites dog. Um , this was the first , uh , politician in a blue state to first Republican politician in a blue state. To. To challenge anti-Covid restrictions. So it was kind of like oh , look at the first. And there was also a strange decision where , uh , Pritzker's rule. Pritzker's Covid policy applied to everybody in the state except for Bailey. So it got this additional quirk of weirdness. He got a restraining order against the. So this is like a juicy , weird story , right ? Yeah. Um , and that's like , perfect , right ? Because this juicy , weird story , um , and I think , uh , so I think conflict , novelty , um. Oh , yeah. Conflict , right. Conflict or conflict being conflict like so. And the tendency to focus on knowns versus unknowns. Right. So Pritzker , actually , if you watch the coverage , was very careful about not naming Darren Bailey. Um , just referring to that politician or that downstate Republican or some Republicans , he actually did a pretty good job. Um , but just in covering the governor and this conflict , you raised up the profile of this unknown politician. Yeah.
S1: Yeah.
S7: I think Clay County has a like a very , very small population. Right. What was it doing there ? Well , this was a state legislator who brand new state legislator , but maybe this was of some interest. But the AP was there , right ? Local media was not there on day one. Local media was only there , I think , on day two and day three. Um , and actually an effort to try to rebuild the local news in Illinois has kind of backfired. It's called Capital of News , Illinois. It's a funded by the families is that supported the Chicago Tribune back in the day. And what this does is it's like a syndicated statehouse news service. So whatever is covered by Capital News Illinois can be used for free by 400 newspapers and 100 broadcast stations. Anybody who's a member of the state press corps. So that actually has this weird role of amplifying somebody who may have no geographic ties because people are eager to have statehouse coverage.
S1: Sure , absolutely. Well , and you you mentioned the AP. And for those who don't know , the AP is the Associated Press , which produces news reports that are used by a number of outlets all across the country , occasionally here at KPBS , too.
S7: One of the biggest issues of conflict. Right. And so we've seen a couple of local school boards , some infighting. Some headlines focused on attention , um , by some radical candidates that are pushing forward agendas that are out of line with , I think , the mainstream republicanism of San Diego. And I want to be really careful when I use the word extremist. When I use the word extremist , I am comparing that to a benchmark against the kind of political norm of a place and a culture , right ? I feel uncomfortable calling somebody an extremist when 50% of Americans plus have voted for that person , right ? When that is not extremism anymore. That is a mainline articulation of ideological beliefs , right ? So I want to be I want to also be precise in our words , because we don't want to call someone an extremist unless they really are.
S1:
S7: I mean , Bailey's decision to sue the governor was a great way to draw attention to coverage , and from that position , he became an election denier. He sponsored a bill to kick Chicago out of the state of Illinois. Right. Just decided he would refuse to support an assault weapon ban. Right. And so by creating kind of like , these stunts , these , like gimme , like , ooh , this is such a , like , a spicy story , right ? Um , they're able to attract attention and then through the norms of , you know , he said , she said conflict report , you know , conflict , personality driven journalism. They're able to when you talk eloquently about the language of constitutionalism , you can window dress what are actually more subversive arguments ? Yeah.
S1:
S7: I've spent a lot of time actually just watching Charlie Kirk do what he does , and and he's a hustler. He was a hustler. He was extraordinarily talented at being able to , um , read through the headlines and help people make sense of things. On the other hand , he deeply , deeply , uh , stirred the pot of forces that were really , really dangerous to lots of people. And I think what we haven't seen enough of is voices of the people who have been hurt by the kinds of ideas that he's pushed forward. And there has been a lot of real personal attacks on folks like doxing , attempts to get people fired. And that's not coming from Charlie Kirk. It's coming from people who want to advocate and act , use their activism to promote his view , to take it. He's the ideal. He's the agenda setter , and they're the implementers. And a lot of people really have been hurt and stand to be hurt by the agendas that he's pushed.
S1:
S7: I think that you just need to look at the state of California to see that , um , I think the Republican Party , uh , actually the mainline what used to be the mainline Republican Party needs to be kind of held accountable for actually not articulating its differentiation. And that's its own sort of balance of power negotiation. But I think we need to be really careful in deciding that everybody who's a Republican is now an extremist. That's just not the way things work , right ? Again , it has to be contextual. And when news organizations to preemptively label any politician of any stripe or even an individual leading a hate group per se as an extremist that's already legitimizing them , you don't want to further legitimize politicians hyperpolarization. polarization their dangerous ideas by covering a politician who is saying things that are really out of step with kind of conventional norms of a place that is making him like that isn't , and making them , whoever it is , a known entity. Hmm.
S1: Hmm. Well , moving toward solutions , how should journalists cover these local stories and nationals national ones too ? Um , that you mentioned earlier , sort of in a way that contributes to civic discourse. Right.
S7: Right. And this is really tricky because especially on broadcast , you don't have infinite time and space and people's attentions don't have infinite time and space. But I think rather than focusing on the personality and the conflict , I think we need to focus on the substance of the issues. We need to think about who might be hurt. I think we can take a lot from mass shooting coverage. Mass shooting coverage has really changed. It hasn't stopped mass shooting , but you don't see the same kind of fixation. Uh , generally speaking , on who the shooter was , let's post their manifesto. Let's dig deep and create this like hagiography , almost unintentionally , of of a bad person , right ? Who killed lots of people ? Um , so I think we can learn a lot from that. The centering of the victims , the centering of problematic laws , the centering of problematic discourse and journalism , especially shows like this and KPBS. Can you have a community room here ? That is , the journalism forgets about its role as a convener. It's not just an information provider , but it can bring people together to have a conversation. And I think that that is a tremendous role for thinking about democracy today , about what journalism can do. Absolutely.
S1: Absolutely. It's one of the things we aim to do is keep those conversations going with the community.
S7: Didn't see a lot of stories about Tiger King running for president until Tiger King had a Netflix episode , right ? We do not cover absolutely every candidate that is running for office , right ? So what is it about this person if they're just kind of like a run of the mill ordinary person other than their shouty , conflicting ideas that merits coverage ? Do they stand a real chance ? Right. So I think that's maybe one thing to think about. And the second thing to think about is if they are surfacing these really alarming views , to what extent are those views representative of a place and people ? So centering that back on , well , is this actually how people in this community feel , or is this an activist takeover ? Um , and in that that becomes the story is like people actually don't feel this way , right ? Um , and setting up the judgment through the reporting about a place.
S1: Right ? Right. Well , hey , this is all something good for folks to take in and think about. I so appreciate you coming here today. I've been speaking with Nick usher. They are a professor of communication at the University of San Diego. Their recent book is called Amplifying Extremism Small Town politicians , media storms , and American journalism. Professor again. Thank you so much.
S7: Thank you so much for having me.
S8: Thank you.
S1: Still to come , the Public Matters Initiative is turning one here about its effort to educate and get people more civically engaged. Welcome back to KPBS midday Edition. I'm Jade Hindman. One year ago today , KPBS launched the Public Matters initiative alongside a news source and Voice of San Diego. The initiative brings content , conversations and events to San Diegans to promote civic engagement. We wanted to highlight one program within that effort. The San Diego documentary program out of I knew , source , Trains and Play and pays rather community members to actually take notes at government meetings , often laying the foundation for in-depth stories. Joining me to talk about the program is Isaac Lila. He is the community news coordinator for eNews source. Isaac , welcome.
S9: Thank you so much for having me.
S1: So glad to have you here.
S9: You know , most of them have their responsibilities outside of the program. They have their jobs. Some of them are students. And so often what they do is they find time in their week to attend government meetings , take notes for us , and then share that information with us. So , you know , the the way their look , their day looks is as varied as everybody else's. Wow.
S1: Wow. Well , one thing that's , you know , really cool about this program is that it lets community members get a say in how their communities are actually covered.
S9: I'm sorry. These people know their communities a lot better than than we do. So , uh , their input is is very valuable. Uh , it allows us to understand aspects of communities that we otherwise wouldn't be able to , um , they're able to listen to conversations in these community meetings from a perspective that perhaps we don't have. Um , and we get to find out a little bit more directly about what people are interested in , uh , focused on worried about , uh , and , you know , allows us to understand them better generally. Yeah.
S1: Yeah. That's so valuable to have that information.
S9: You know , we get even little snippets and government to information about local events , opportunities for resources. Uh , so we have opportunities to present useful information to people of all kinds , but a few specific examples , just that , that come to mind. We , for example , covered a , uh , a footnote in in the City of San Diego law that allowed for higher density , uh , construction in a specific neighborhood in southeast San Diego. And we only found out about that because of a community planning group meeting that one of the documents was covered. So we followed up on the story. And , you know , the people in that community were making their voices heard. And eventually the city of San Diego decided to overturn that. That footnote along the same lines. You know , we've covered stories about city budget. There was a story of a position in the city of San Diego that hadn't been officially budgeted for. And we found out through one of these notes that that was the case. And so one of our investigative reporters did a little bit more digging into that. So we , you know , we get all kinds of information and and we follow up on it. Mhm.
S1: Mhm. You know , research shows that Americans trust in government and each other is really on the decline. And many fear democracy is just eroding. How does this initiative you think address those concerns head on.
S9: It gives us a lot of different opportunities , I think , for the most part. Oftentimes when this distrust kind of festers , it happens to be because we don't understand each other as well as as we probably could. So the documentary is a collaborative effort with the community , and through that , it gives us an opportunity for for everybody to get to know each other a little better. Um , community members get a little bit of an insight and more direct contact with with news people , and they get to better understand the way news is put together , and they get to provide input in how that news is covered. And at the same time , it allows us to understand those communities better and and their perspectives and where their opinions come from. Um , through that , you know , it also allows members of the community to understand their local government better , to engage with other people in their communities more directly and more , more proactively. Um , so it just gives us an opportunity to to interact with each other and understand each other a little better , I think.
S1:
S9: You know , obviously , the the way that we address the story is , is going to be slightly , uh , influenced by some of the experiences that we've had ourselves. So in , in being in contact with more people within the community , those , uh , those perspectives become wider. And , and we're able to address stories from a more complete picture.
S1: I think such a great program Graham there. I've been speaking with Isa Brambilla. He's the community news coordinator for I news source. It's actually Isaac. So sorry about that. For more information about the documentary's program , head to San Diego documentaries.org. Isaac , thank you so much.
S9: Thank you for having me.
S1: That's our show for today. I'm your host , Jade Hindman. Thanks for tuning in to Midday Edition. Be sure to have a great day on purpose , everyone.
