Have the values of young women and men diverged? How was forestry written about in the context of the destruction of the freshwater pearl mussels? Is religion allowed to be visible in Finnish culture? Sopiva ry has been discussing, among other things, how to address these issues in journalism in its “Kuumat perunat”-news letter and discussion forums since spring 2024. The discussion series at Media museum and archive Merkki will be organised in cooperation with Vikes.
The newsletter shows in practice how conciliatory journalism works. Conciliatory journalistic analysis clarifies the tensions in public disputes by highlighting the main voices and arguments and also identifying the underlying values and emotions. The newsletter prompts its readers to reflect on what we actually knew about the current controversy, beyond the fact that it was “stirring up in the media”.
From there, the discussion can continue so that different perspectives and experiences can fit in the same room. For mediation journalism, polyphony is important: we ask who in the public debate has not been listened to or interpreted correctly. Kuumat perunat live debates, organized as a dialogue, are a good example of how guiding people to listen strengthens their trust in each other and in the realization that there is still value in a shared conversation.
The principles created by researchers and journalists in 2017 still work. Journalists and the public alike need ways to deal better with conflicts. Conciliatory journalism can provide a space to reflect on how the media contribute to the creation and maintenance of disputes and upheavals. And also how journalism can help us to understand more thoroughly the conflicts that are visible in society, and thus learn how to tolerate disagreement and argue better.
We are not alone
Concerns about the polarisation of the public sphere have been voiced for years, both in Finland and elsewhere in the West, and there are many proposals for improvement. Conciliatory journalism brings a a special toolbox for understanding journalistic practices and everyday life to this field.
We have been involved in developing ways to measure the diversity of voices in journalism and providing various trainings to support editorial staff and journalists. We have networked extensively in the fields of both research and conciliation, and have also contributed to the international debate.
Conciliatory journalism is therefore neither a school nor a single magic bullet. We are here to engage in debate and produce knowledge so that together we can address the challenges of the current public debate and strengthen the capacity of journalism to support pluralistic democracy. In this work, we are stronger when we join forces – which is why working with Vikes is valuable for Sopiva, for conciliatory journalism, and for the wider pluralistic public debate.
Text by Noora Kettunen & Mikko Hautakangas, Sopiva ry.
Picture by Vanessa Riki
