Some topics are prone to fierce online and offline discussions. Only some people who get involved in such discussions configure themselves to content, but emotions and personalities are often played on to get a rise. Interested in how to keep the dialogue going in times of polarisation and enter the debate with an open mind? On Friday, 14 June, Radboud Knowledge Centre for Rhetoric Peitho will be organising several activities around this theme under the title: An Open Mind. In the afternoon, there will be a programme for all interested parties with lectures and a panel discussion with experts from practice and science at the Lux Nijmegen. In addition, for those interested in application in professional practice, there is a workshop in the morning on convincing communication and reaction strategies in times of hardening discussions and polarisation.
An Open Mind: morning programme (in Dutch)
An Open Mind: afternoon programme (in Dutch)
Some topics are prone to fierce online and offline discussions. Only some people who get involved in such discussions configure themselves to content, but emotions and personalities are often played on to get a rise. People who take a public stand on issues such as climate change, vaccinations or freedom of choice in food soon face harsh personal attacks, sometimes on a fairly large scale.
An example can be seen from the reactions to the message from the University of Groningen on 7 May that (among others) former NOS meteorologist Gerrit Hiemstra would receive an honorary doctorate. Hiemstra will receive his honorary doctorate because of "his exceptional achievements as an expert in the field of meteorology and (the consequences of) climate change". The reactions on X/Twitter and similar channels were predictable: 'a disgrace to science', 'the world is nuts', 'almost criminal' and 'this country is dead and dying', accompanied by angry, sick or hysterically smiling emojis.
What is striking is that these reactions are still mildly worded compared to what Hiemstra (but also, for instance, his fellow weatherman Reinier van den Berg) gets thrown at him on social media and via email. Hiemstra is no longer active on Twitter, but on the social networks Mastodon and Bluesky, he continues to post messages about climate change (and more generally about politics and policy). His message, he feels, is too important. He keeps telling others [...] that we need to do something about climate change. In a podcast on NPO Radio 1, he explains that he expects people to be able to adjust their opinions if they see enough evidence, so he wants to keep showing that evidence.
In 2021, he received the Machiavelli Prize, awarded for a remarkable achievement in the field of public communication. The jury report said: "In plain language, he crosses swords with climate sceptics at home and abroad. With great patience, he replies to people who react to his messages. Calm but also passionate, Hiemstra continues to explain what the problem is and what the causes are. He remains approachable and reaches a wide audience with his accessible delivery of information."
This broad audience is precisely where gains can be made in this kind of discussion. People who enter these discussions are probably unconvincing, but this does not always apply to online followers. If they have not yet formed an opinion on the issue or have not heard certain arguments or evidence, they will still get new information, thanks to Hiemstra's response. In his book, Thank you for arguing: What Aristotle, Lincoln and Homer Simpson Can Teach Us About the Art of Persuasion, Jay Heinrichs calls this 'Audience Targeting'. You are actually addressing a broader, still persuasive audience while talking to someone you will not convince. In this way, a discussion that seems pointless can still achieve something.
Interested in how to keep the dialogue going in times of polarisation and enter the debate with an open mind? Sign up for An Open Mind on Friday, 14 June with a morning programme containing workshops, and/or an afternoon programme with lectures and a panel discussion. Both programmes are in Dutch.