Why should businesses even care about a healthy environment? That’s a fundamental issue for Yvon Chouinard, founder of Patagonia, the outdoor clothing company. Chouinard and Patagonia are respected by many environmentalists who credit them for putting this philosophy into practice:
“Fundamentally, businesses are responsible to their resource base. Without a healthy environment there are no shareholders, no employees, no customers and no business. Our mission is to use business to inspire and implement solutions to the environmental crisis” Yvon Chouinard, Patagonia
Chouinard is putting his money where his mouth is with a generous company “Earth Tax” devoted to environmental activism. He explained to me how he’s inspired young people and companies to protect the environment.
Nevertheless, Patagonia is arguably fighting a losing battle, especially at Christmas time, when rampant consumerism is in full swing. Here’s my latest BBC report that explores the contrast between Patagonia’s priorities and that of Silicon Valley shoppers who just want “more stuff” and wouldn’t dream of being seen twice in the same dress (dahling!)
This week, as the pro-business, “to hell with the environment” Trump administration prepares to take power, I plan to launch a new series of interviews. My aim is to profile leaders and organizations that are making the environment and climate change action a priority; and are standing up to Trump’s anti-science, anti-environment recklessness.
My report aired on BBC Business Matters on December 23rd. The segment starts at 16:00 on the BBC podcast.
Here’s a transcript of the segment (edited for length and clarity) and a longer version of the report:
BBC Host, Roger Hearing: Alison, I know you’ve been looking at all this…the commercialization of Christmas…I imagine where you are in California, there are a lot of people being pushed into buying things they might not want to? I gather you’ve been investigating…
Alison van Diggelen: Absolutely. I had a rare interview with Yvon Chouinard…he’s the founder of Patagonia, the sustainable outdoor clothing company and is revered by many environmentalists. Chouinard explained to me why his company wants to minimize its impact on the environment and inspire other businesses to do the same. I visited one of Silicon Valley’s busiest malls to see if this green message is resonating with consumers.
[Music: Walking in a Winter Wonderland at Valley Fair Mall]
Alison van Diggelen: I’m here in the mall and there’s a tangible sense of stress as Christmas fast approaches. Shoppers crowd their favorite stores, cell phone lists in one hand, fistfuls of bags in the other. Exhausted mothers and fathers are pushing prams, groups of teenagers maraud the aisles, laughing and posing for photos.
I’m right by the “North Pole” and Santa is waving to wide-eyed children, surrounded by about a dozen Christmas trees with twinkling lights and red baubles. A baby took one look at Santa and started crying. There’s a sickly sweet smell of cinnamon and pumpkin spice in the air. People are looking for bargains: quantity not quality. For many shoppers, “the environment” is the last thing on their minds.
Eggnog gal: There are a little bit of Grinches…but that comes with Christmas. They’re very angry and hostile and they just want to get in the mall, get everything they want and leave. Maybe it’s just the crowds, the financial burden. Maybe they’re just not in the holiday spirit this year.
Young mom: My son’s closet looks like Beyonce’s…it just has so much clothing in it. I love children’s clothing and I buy him so so much. He’s two and a half and he’s so cute! [laughter]
Teen: I just feel like, if I wear a dress once, people see me wear it, like I’d rather have a new dress…something else people can see me in. I’d rather have more stuff than just like one really expensive thing.
Alison van Diggelen: This “wear once” mentality is abhorrent to Yvon Chouinard, who’s notorious for wearing the same flannel shirt for over 20 years. His company, Patagonia is known for its sustainable outdoor clothing. As a founding member of the “One Percent for the Planet” organization, it donates one percent of its sales (not just profits) to environmental causes.
Alison van Diggelen: You’ve impacted so many businesses. Steve Jobs once called you to “green” Apple?
Yvon Chouinard: We’re influencing small companies, not large companies. A lot of the green stuff is green washing.
Alison van Diggelen: Do you feel Apple’s efforts are green washing?
Yvon Chouinard: Absolutely – it’s like that with every large corporation. They’ll pick the low hanging fruit, but when it starts getting a little bit tougher…They’ll do the things that turn into more profits, but when you really have to knuckle down and be truly responsible, they’re not going to do it.
Alison van Diggelen: What do you feel has been your biggest influence in greening the world? The business or consumer side?
Yvon Chouinard: Young people. I wrote this book “Let my people go surfing” that has gone around in nine languages and that has influenced a lot of young people and small companies are really paying attention. The idea of changing large corporations is pretty naive of me.
Alison van Diggelen: I spoke with Jesse Simons of the Sierra Club, an environmental group founded by Scottish naturalist John Muir. He praises Patagonia’s eco leadership but feels it could do more…
Jesse Simons: I’d like to see Patagonia go “all in” on their work on clean energy (and follow Apple’s lead by) committing to 100% clean energy and doing it all the way up the supply chain to ensure that every piece of clothing, zippers, everything are coming from a manufacturing site powered by the wind, the sun and the earth.
Alison van Diggelen: Gary Cook at Greenpeace credits Patagonia’s efforts against our “throw away culture” with its “don’t buy this jacket” campaign and its repair and recycling services. But he points to the company’s continued use of toxic chemicals and he’d like to see them eliminated from its supply chain.
Although Patagonia is seen to be raising the bar on corporate sustainability practices, its prices are out of reach for many consumers. Back at the mall, I spoke with another bargain hunter…
Diana V: We went to check out the Patagonia store in Reno, Nevada and couldn’t find anything for under $100, so we left…We’re just being very cautious right now with our money. Waiting to see what happens with our economy and our national political situation.
End of Report
Bonus material
This part of our interview didn’t make the final cut:
On Patagonia doing more
Sierra Club’s Jesse Simons: I’d like to see them (Patagonia) work with other outdoor industry brands to show them how it actually makes biz sense to stand up to bad trade deals. It would be great to see them take their leadership and use it to get other companies to similarly pay a living wage, take care of the environment in countries where they’re manufacturing their goods, so that they can feel good about saying no to bad trade deals.
Chouinard talks on Earth Tax, Agriculture and Death (I’ll post the full interview here soon for your listening pleasure)
A: Tell me about your trip to Scotland in 1970 – why was that the inspiration for Patagonia clothing?
Y: I was in business of making climbing equipment. I came to Scotland to climb Ben Nevis and saw a rugby shirt in Dept store in Edinburgh. At that time, active sportswear was basically grey flannel sweatshirts, pants. Men didn’t wear colorful sports clothes. It had a blue body, yellow stripes. I was wearing it around Yosemite, everyone said “Woah!” A light went off…I imported a few…I said, maybe I’ll get into the clothing business.
A:Tell me about that 1% for the planet? An earth tax?
Y: Your typical large corporation is out to make as much money as they can for the shareholders. And what the shareholders do with their profits is their biz. We believe it should be done in the business as well.
I believe in taxes. Especially the kind of taxes where you get to decide where the money goes. So we just tax ourselves 1% of our sales – not our profits – 1% of revenue given away to 900 different small activist organizations working to save our planet.
A: Some people say there’s a conflict here: you are an environmental company. You’re saying: save the planet but at the same time, you’re saying: buy our products. You have to make your products, you have to sell your products. You have to make a profit in order to stay in business. Otherwise you go belly up. So talk about that conflict between being a company, a business and doing good for the planet.
Y: Well, to put a spin on it. I’d say buying a jacket from us causes less harm to the environment than buying a jacket from another company that doesn’t put all the thought and processes causing the least amount of harm. For instance, we only use organically grown cotton. That’s fine. Growing cotton organically causes less harm but it doesn’t do the world any good. It still causes the world a lot of harm. That’s why I decided to go into the food business. I want to go beyond organic foods, organic cotton to what’s called regenerative agriculture. The difference is, regenerative agriculture builds soil and captures carbon. And so now I have to go to my cotton farmers – who supply us with cotton – and say: you can’t plow any more because every time you plow, it releases all the carbon you’ve captured back into the air. So agriculture is one of the biggest causes of global warming so it’s probably the biggest thing we can do to save this planet.
A: So is that going to be a major focus for Patagonia?
Y: It’s a major focus for me, that’s for sure. I’m really excited about this. I think it’s our only hope to regulate the climate. We’re not going to do it any other way. Agriculture has a chance of sequestering so much carbon out of the air through changing our grazing practices and our farming practices; and basically going back to the old way of doing things. And that’s what gets me excited.
A: Tell me about the long term future. How are you going to make sure, beyond your lifetime, that Patagonia keeps the environment central to its mission.
Y: We’ve become a B-corporation company. That’s different than a regular corporation. In a B-corporation you can put down what your values are and they have to be values that are good for the planet, good for society. So the way the law states: if I die tomorrow, the stock is in a trust and this trust would have 8 years to divest 80% of that because the law doesn’t want you to have all your stock, your foundation have all your stock in one corporation. (In) a B-corp you wouldn’t necessarily have to do that and we wouldn’t have to sell to the highest bidder which would be to go public. All the laws force you to go public, pretty much…we wouldn’t have to do that
A: But would it keep the environment central to its mission?
Y: That’s part of the values that we’ve inculcated in our charter, under being a B-corporation.
A: Will your son or daughter stay at the helm?
Y: I don’t know…I have no idea what’s going to happen after I’m dead.
A: Are you grooming them to do so?
Y: Yeah, they are slowly taking over more responsibility, absolutely. My daughter is head of sportswear design right now and my son is on the board. They both have the same values that my wife and I have.
A: One last question: going back to Scotland – John Muir, I know he’s been an inspiration to you. Do you have a favorite quote or inspiration from him?
Y: (laughter) When I was a climber, it was John Muir and Emerson, Thoreau and the transcendentalists, philosophers which had a different attitude to climbing mountains than say the Europeans did, which was to conquer the mountains; and our attitude was you climb them and leave no trace of having been there.
This is a timely story about addiction, suffering, and how one tenacious woman found her purpose in life. Everyone I’ve talked to about this story has been fascinated, full of questions. That got me more and more excited about sharing it.
Sometimes I just pinch myself that I became an accidental journalist. This week more than ever. Interviewing people like Elon Musk, Richard Branson and Meryl Streep is thrilling. Being in the same space as the Dalai Lama, or witnessing the first solar-powered plane take off from a Silicon Valley runway is inspiring, but this month’s assignment for the BBC outshines all of that. Raising awareness about a relatively unknown, and potentially lethal syndrome, and helping to save lives, gives my work a more profound purpose. My research shows the syndrome is growing in prevalence and severity around the world.
Katie Nava, a nurse in California, almost died from this syndrome, but she’s now helping people recover. I’m so thankful to her for sharing her vulnerability and her inspiring story so candidly.
“I gave up weed and went to my Facebook page. I’ve found my calling. It was an unfortunate way to find it. I owe my life to the page. We’re spreading awareness.” Nurse, Katie Nava.
We’re all aware that the impacts of the Covid pandemic on our mental health has been brutal. The data is only now coming to light and experts say it’s just the tip of the iceberg. So, if one of your coping mechanisms has been to start using, or use pot a wee bit more than you did previously, please read on and share this with friends who might be over-indulging their love for cannabis. And tell your friends in the medical field how to identify this syndrome.
Keith Humphreys is a professor at Stanford, an expert in addiction, and one of my favorite academic experts to interview. He sums up the problem like this:
“Everyone in public health needs to be engaged and not fall for the line that cannabis is unlike any other drug in history. Every drug can have a bad effect. That’s the reality of our experience, the reality of chemistry.” Keith Humphreys
Here’s a longer version of the transcript: Alison van Diggelen: When Katie Nava had her first experience of Cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome, CHS, she felt like she was going to die…
Katie Nava: It’s the most painful thing. You want to commit suicide in the middle of an episode.
The intensity made me nauseous. I’d spend the rest of day on the floor throwing up in this excruciating knotted up, doubled over pain. Like someone took a knife and twisted it in your stomach. You can’t stop it. We’ve coined the term scromiting: screaming while you vomit. My pain was always in the exact same place: It’s right where your stomach and esophagus meet. It’s just on fire. My throat would always be on fire, I had post nasal drip all the time…
Alison van Diggelen: For four years, Katie Nava, a licensed nurse in Southern California, was in and out of the Emergency Room, and had countless appointments with gastro, ENT and other specialist doctors. She had CAT Scans, colonoscopies, and doctors even suggested surgery to remove her gall bladder. Despite a digital trail of medical evidence from her Kaiser doctors, no one could identify what ailed her.
Katie Nava: I started thinking I was crazy. They would say nothing is wrong with me. I was getting labeled as a drug seeker. It hurt so much.
Alison van Diggelen: Finally, a nurse at another hospital recognized the symptoms and asked Katie Nava if she used marijuana. She was diagnosed with Cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome, also known as CHS.
The first mention of CHS in the medical literature was not that long ago. In 2004 Australian doctors noticed a link between 19 cases of cyclic vomiting in people who used marijuana. Since then cases have been recorded in the UK, France, Australia, the Netherlands, Canada, Spain, New Zealand, as well as here in the US.
The bouts of vomiting, nausea, and severe abdominal pain tend to impact long term, heavy users of marijuana, though some younger people who smoke concentrates only a few times a week have had it too.
Kevin Hill: The precise mechanism is unclear at this point. It’s thought to involve the dysregulation of the body’s naturally occurring endocannabinoid system. There are receptors located throughout the body, primarily in the brain, sometimes in the GI tract.
Extensive use may lead to changes in function of the receptors. Ultimately those receptors in the GI tract, in the gut, appear to be affected in an adverse way, that’s when abdominal pain, nausea and vomiting can result. …
Alison van Diggelen: Nurse Katie Nava describes it more vividly:
Katie Nava: Your endocannabinoid system is like a fuse box and someone ripped it out. It’s like spaghetti wires misfiring everywhere. It’s why our bodies can’t thermo-regulate, it’s why our brains can’t talk to our stomachs properly. It doesn’t help that we’re so dehydrated, and why it’s the number one thing that kills CHS patients: kidney failure.
Alison van Diggelen: As well as the non-stop vomiting, patients also often experience dramatic weight loss, a rapid heart rate and dangerously low potassium levels. One piece of the puzzle that might help doctors to diagnose it is: if patients tell them that hot showers or baths help to alleviate these symptoms.
So does Dr Hill think it might be possible to identify those most at risk?
Kevin Hill: It’s very likely there’s a genetic component to it. Most people who use cannabis don’t have this problem, so it’s something particular to a subset who use it. What we do know is, if you use cannabis, this is a possibility and if they present with symptoms they need to stop using. If not appropriately diagnosed, you can have very serious consequences.
Alison van Diggelen: It’s been reported that two people have died from CHS. And the dehydration caused by vomiting can have long term impacts on the heart and liver. Once relatively rare, CHS is becoming more common around the world, especially where marijuana has been legalized. Dr. Hill estimates about three million people have suffered CHS in the United States and his hospital has treated thousands of patients.
Kevin Hill: I’m at Beth Israel Deaconess Harvard teaching hospital. I routinely work with folks in our emergency department… They’re seeing these cases more and more.
Alison van Diggelen: Some ER doctors in SF are seeing it on every shift. Other nurses in Denver see it about once a week, but it’s on the rise.
Keith Humphreys is a professor of behavioral sciences and a leading addiction scholar at Stanford University.
Keith Humphreys: The majority of Americans have access to recreational cannabis. At least 80-90% have access to medicinal cannabis… There’s always been a wink and a nod as to what medical cannabis is in the United States.
THC is the principal intoxicant in the plant. In the 1980s, 1990s, a typical plant might have 5-7% THC. Studies of the current legal market show they have 20%. Some products have 50-80%: DABS and wax extract. It’s dramatically stronger.
Speaking as a scientist, I don’t really know much what they do: there are fundamentally novel products I wouldn’t want to generalize, any more than I’d say: You can understand what it’s like to drink a pint of vodka, if you’ve had a pint of beer.
Great Increases in the dose of the drug can have effects you can’t infer from the low dose.
There’s been a great increase in the number of people who use cannabis every day… Perhaps tied to potency: More people are addicted. More users look like cigarette smokers; all day long they have cannabis going. That was uncommon in the days of lower potency.
Alison van Diggelen: One study from the Netherlands found that the concentration of THC (tetrahydrocannabinol) – the compound that makes you feel “high” – in cannabis sold in retail outlets had roughly doubled between 2000 and 2015. (from link above)
Humphreys says the number of people using cannabis in the United States is growing about 3-5% a year, but the volume of cannabis sold is going up much faster. Kevin Hill: The purity and potency of any cannabinoid you use, including whole plant cannabis, is critical to know because it does appear the adverse effects of cannabis are often dose dependent….When I talk to patients, about what they’re using, I want to know specifically and ask them to bring in labels.
You have to know what you’re putting in your body, to know the potential outcome can be, either good or bad.
Alison van Diggelen: So – what’s more dangerous? Vaping, smoking or edibles?
.
Kevin Hill: In terms of health effects, smoking is the worst possible thing you can do. Vaping is slightly better than combustible cannabis, but oral cannabis products are better in that way. We want people to be thoughtful…
There are always risks involved. You wanna get products from a reputable source. In general oral consumption is the least harmful, depending on the dose involved. If you get to the point where your use is creeping up… Sometimes intervention is necessary. Talk to a healthcare provider.
Alison van Diggelen: Professor Humphreys believes that alongside people learning more about what they’re using, healthcare professionals need to be aware of CHS – to catch it early.
Keith Humphreys: People who work in hospitals need to be aware of it and generally are not. We need more public health messaging to counter the industry message which is: it cures everything and has no downside!
We don’t tolerate that for other substances like tobacco, alcohol because we know it can harm people. We need it not just for CHS, but for memory problems, concentration problems. People do worse in school if they’re heavy users.
Public health is in a defensive crouch about cannabis, compared to tobacco and alcohol, in part because they have a powerful industry on the other side of the table. It’s also more cultural: no one wants to be a finger-wagging, blue rinse activist saying: bad bad cannabis! Once it’s legal, that argument is over. Now it’s just like any other thing.
This is really in the hands of our political leadership and regulators. Will we learn the lesson of alcohol and tobacco? If we don’t regulate we get a lot of public health damage. Are we going to treat this as a cash cow and let industry sell as much as it wants? Or will we say: wait a minute, if we take all the controls off, you get a lot of suffering. Everyone in public health needs to be engaged and not fall for the line that cannabis is unlike any other drug in history. Every drug can have a bad effect. That’s the reality of our experience, the reality of chemistry.
Alison van Diggelen: Katie Nava has learned the hard way about the risks associated with cannabis use….
Katie Nava: We’ve created a super plant – don’t abuse it! If someone had told me: don’t smoke 20 joints a day, I woulda listened. Now it’s too late. I’ve completely ruined my body, my endocannabinoid system’s wrecked.
Alison van Diggelen: Giving anti-nausea drugs and replacing the minerals lost during vomiting with electrolytes are central to treating CHS. Antipsychotic drugs like Ativan and haloperidol can also help. But the only proven way to cure CHS is to stop cannabis use entirely.
Katie Nava: It’s literally a game of Russian Roulette…it’s a ticking time bomb.
Alison van Diggelen: Nava stopped two years ago, and she even avoids foods like black pepper, truffle oils, and broccoli that contain cannabinoids. Helping run a Cannabinoid Hyperemesis Recovery support group on Facebook keeps her busy. Founded three years ago, the support group now has over 12,000 members from around the world. Membership is growing about 10% a month. (8500 of the members are in the U.S., 1400 in Canada, 400 in UK).
Katie Nava: It was my AA (Alcoholics Anonymous) meeting. It helped me stay sober. It was my exchange. I gave up weed and went to my Facebook page. I’ve found my calling. It was an unfortunate way to find it. I owe my life to the page. We’re spreading awareness.
Alison van Diggelen: What else does Nurse Nava think should be done to raise awareness?
Katie Nava: If dispensaries would just put up signs saying: Hey this is what CHS is! Then, if someone comes down with it, they wouldn’t spend four years in misery like I did.
If someone had told you on January 19th that a skinny young woman from L.A. would upstage the inauguration of our new President Joe Biden, dramatic performances by J.Lo and Lady Gaga, and even the joyful swearing-in of our first female VP, Kamala Harris, you might’ve been dubious. But the effervescent Amanda Gorman outshone all the stars with her wise words and soulful delivery. She tapped into the zeitgeist of America, addressed the “terrifying hour” of January 6th, and challenged us to “rebuild, reconcile and recover.” Gorman reminds us that there’s always light, if only we’re brave enough to see it, if only we’re brave enough tobe it.
When the world seems dark and our lives continue to be dislocated by the pandemic, I often think of Amanda Gorman, and listen to her poem, again and again. In watching her interviews with everyone from Trevor Noah to Anderson Cooper, I’m inspired by her poise, her wisdom and her optimism. Did you know that from age seven she’s been preparing to become president of the United States? That gives me hope.
This week, as Trump’s impeachment trial began in the U.S. Senate, and we’re forced to relive the horror of January 6th, I’m exploring these questions: How did our our country become so polarized and our politics so violent? And is there any hope for closing the divide? And what’s the role of empathy in the process? Is there a role for you and me?
I sought out the wisdom of three experts. And there is good news. My latest BBC report aims to do two things:
Help us understand how we got here: by exploring insights from psychology, anthropology and sociology.
Offer some tangible action we can all do to douse the fire and live more peacefully with people with whom we don’t agree.
Although Amanda Gorman was featured in my original draft, she didn’t make the final cut for the BBC (due to time constraints). Yet the words of her inauguration poem echoed the wisdom I gleaned from the experts: We must put our differences aside and focus on what unites us, our common aspirations. We must try to build bridges, and (as hard as it is sometimes) assume good intent. So I’d like to start this week’s Fresh Dialogues podcast by revisiting Gorman’s rousing performance at President Biden’s inauguration, before I share my report.
“We close the divide because we know, to put our future first, we must first put our differences aside. We lay down our arms so we can reach out our arms to one another. We seek harm to none and harmony for all…”
Here’s a transcript of the report which aired on the BBC (including some parts which didn’t make the final cut):
Trump: They’re bringing drugs, they’re bringing crime, they’re rapists, and some I assume are good people. Hillary Clinton: You could put half of Trump supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables: the racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic, you name it…”
Alison van Diggelen: That was Democratic party candidate Hillary Clinton during her presidential run in 2016 and before her, Donald Trump during his bid as the Republican candidate, when he made his infamous comments about undocumented Mexican immigrants.
Dan Fessler is a professor of anthropology at the University of California in Los Angeles. He’s convinced that provocative language leads to dehumanization and is a key driver of the polarization problem.
Dan Fessler: Any time that you hear any politician, or candidate for office, talking about “them and they,” describing a competing party in terms that homogenize it, that treat it as uniform: “those people over there.” When single labels are applied, alarm bells should go off and you should start to ask yourself whether the humanity of people with different ideas is being eroded. This is happening in the US and around the world. As soon as it becomes “us vs them” we slide down the road of seeing others in our society as less than human.
Alison van Diggelen: As an anthropologist, Dan Fessler frames the issue with a wide lens.
Dan Fessler: I try to understand contemporary human behavior in the context of the species’ long evolutionary history, characterized by both remarkable co-operation, and a very long history of inter-group conflict. That propensity is strongly selected for. So it’s easy for us to flip into a mindset that leads to dehumanization, that’s an inherent part of our human psychology.
The perception of “the other” has a class component to it, those with more education and those with less interact less, live in different geographical regions, and confront different challenges. It’s easy to conceptualize “the other” as homogeneous and less worthy.
Alison van Diggelen:Larry Diamond, a professor of political science and sociology at Stanford University agrees about the danger of dehumanization.
Larry Diamond: The polarization in the U.S. and other advanced democracies represents an empathy gap. We aren’t even trying to see the world through the eyes of people very different from ourselves and to understand their pain and anxiety.
Alison van Diggelen: In the US, people have always had different views on issues like tax rates, gun control and health care, and held opposing moral and religious positions. Racism has a deep history in the country, and has been fanned by recent events. But more recently the rising inequality and growing opportunity gap have also contributed to the toxic mix. And according to Larry Diamond a new level of inflammatory and divisive rhetoric combined with conspiracy theories has pushed polarization to new extremes.
Larry Diamond: We have to put a heavy stress on leaders, political leaders who give oxygen to this fire.
Trump (6 January, 2021): All of us here today do not want to see our election victory stolen by emboldened radical left democrats which is what they are doing, and stolen by the fake news media. That’s what they’ve done….
Larry Diamond: Leaders who inspire it, give legitimacy to it, and who led these people falsely and cynically to believe that their candidate had won this election when they hadn’t.
Trump: We will stop the steal.
Alison van Diggelen: Larry Diamond identifies partisan news media and social media as further amplifying the resentment and political polarization.
Larry Diamond: The technological disruption is super charging these people in terms of disinformation, rumor, conspiracy theories… The human brain is wired to be receptive to shocking rumors [ you can go all the way back to witch hunts…] but social media connects people on a larger scale and diffuses and magnifies these conspiracy theories and facilitates misinformation at a pace and scale we’ve never seen.
Alison van Diggelen:Rachel Kleinfeld is a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. She points to psychological research on our susceptibility to fake news and conspiracy theories.
Rachel Kleinfeld: We all want to believe what we want to believe, so strongly – it’s an idea called motivated cognition. In experiments with rats, they found when you hear a confirmation of your belief, it’s like getting a hit of dopamine, getting a drug. So people really want to confirm their own beliefs. They seek out information that confirms their beliefs, they hear it faster, they see it more quickly on a page. Amazing when you got through this research…
Alison van Diggelen: So what might it take to heal the deep divisions in the United States?
President Joe Biden (January 20, 2021): This is our historic moment of crisis and challenge, and unity is the path forward. And, we must meet this moment as the United States of America.
Alison van Diggelen: This is part of President Joe Biden’s inauguration speech on the 20th of January.
President Joe Biden: Let us listen to one another. Hear one another. See one another. Show respect to one another. Politics doesn’t have to be a raging fire destroying everything in its path. Every disagreement doesn’t have to be a cause for total war.
Alison van Diggelen: Larry Diamond believes Biden’s call for more listening and mutual respect is achievable. He’s encouraged by the results of an experiment called “America in One Room.” In 2019, his team from Stanford gathered a diverse group of five hundred US citizens for three days at a resort in Texas. They were given non-partisan factual information and neutral moderators led discussions about political issues. Living together, having meals and talking together helped them see one another in a whole new light.
Larry Diamond: We had African Americans who said they’d never got to know a white person socially before, a white suburban housewife who’d say I’ve never met an undocumented immigrant before. Once you meet people and see they’re human beings too and that you share some common aspirations and emotions with them, the instinct to demonize them is immediately de-escalated….We did achieve a reductions in emotional polarization and animus.
Alison van Diggelen: The researchers also recorded significant changes of opinion. The most polarizing policy proposals, from both the left and the right, generally lost support, and the more centrist proposals gained popularity. Could this experiment be replicated and made part of a national discourse? Diamond hopes that the experiment can be expanded across America using online video conferencing, to help build empathy between people who view each other as enemies.
Larry Diamond: We now have the (technological) ability to scale this up with automated moderators that ensure equal participation in the conversation…There’s no reason why, if we have the funding and sense of civic purpose why we can’t organize open minded, mutually respectful conversations among millions of Americans in the coming years.
Alison van Diggelen: And evolutionary psychologist Dan Fessler points out that if we want to close the divide and build bridges, it’s important to start with the right assumptions.
Dan Fessler: The first step is to recognize the other person or group is not inherently bad. Someone can be a good person and see the world differently than you do. If we begin with the premise that this is a reasonable person who is moral, and is motivated by things they believe in, then the question becomes: how can I understand what they believe in and where can I find things we agree on?
That’s not to be naive and to suppose there aren’t people out there who do wish to harm and exploit others, there are, but that should be your last conclusion, not your starting premise when you interact with someone with whom you disagree.
Alison van Diggelen: And Rachel Kleinfeld offers this advice for healing rifts with relatives, friends and neighbors. For example, what if you’re liberal and live next door to a (fervent) Trump supporter?
Rachel Kleinfeld: Focus on the things you have in common and try to rebuild neighborly ties. No one wants bad relationships with their neighbors. For whatever reason, they might have been a racist, someone who simply liked the tax breaks or really believes that abortion is wrong and they liked getting the judges that would support that view. You don’t know why they voted for Trump, but you do know that when it snows they have to clear their driveway just like you do, then you can commiserate and build some bonds over those things.
REPORT ENDS
And finally, another reason I’m optimistic today is an interview I did this week with Harvard professor, Marshall Ganz. He shared some valuable wisdom about how to turn anger and outrage into constructive action. It’s something he knows a lot about. If you’re not familiar with his work, check out his Research Page or his Wikipedia page. As well as working with Cezar Chavez to help secure decent working conditions for farm workers, he’s credited with creating the successful grassroots organizing model and training for Barack Obama’s winning presidential campaign in 2008.
Once again, thanks to the BBC’s talented Andrew Luck-Baker who did a herculean job editing my original draft, and thanks also to the experts who were so generous with their time: Dan Fessler, Larry Diamond, Rachel Kleinfeld and Marshall Ganz. I look forward to sharing more of Marshall’s insights with you next month.
And I’d like to give the last word to Amanda Gorman, because as she reminded us in her recent interview with Michelle Obama, “I am not lightning that strikes once. I am the hurricane that comes every single year, and you can expect to see me again soon.”
Just in case you need reminding, here’s our call to action from Amanda Gorman:
“When day comes we step out of the shade, aflame and unafraid, the new dawn blooms as we free it. For there is always light, if only we’re brave enough to see it. If only we’re brave enough to be it.”
I hope you and yours are staying well despite the violent insurrection in Washington DC on January 6th. This week, I want to bring you some hope and optimism for the future from an unlikely source. More on that below.
First, I’d like to share two insights that resonated with me as I sought to make sense of the attempted coup and think about a pathway forward.
The first is from our newly elected Georgia Senator, Raphael Warnock. PBS’s Judy Woodruff asked how we can get anything done with such a divided country and Senate. Warnock said “we have no choice!” and added this:
“Either we will learn to live together as sisters and brothers, or we will perish together as fools.” Martin Luther King Jr. speech in St. Louis, on March 22, 1964 (In Warnock’s version he added the sisters. Amen to that.)
And Warnock posed this key question: Do we want to continue in our silos of violent racial, political and religious hatred, or do we want to build what Dr. King called the beloved community?
The other resonant voice for me was President Barack Obama. He laid the blame firmly with Trump and his enablers. I felt that he was also speaking directly to me and all my fellow journalists when he wrote: “For two months now, a political party and its accompanying media ecosystem has too often been unwilling to tell their followers the truth…” Obama offered Republican leaders a choice: to either continue down a dark path or “choose reality…and choose America”
Although the majority of the media blame rests with Fox News, Sean Hannity, and all those media and social media platforms that allowed the false narrative of a “stolen election” to be amplified, every single journalist should examine his or her actions over the last four years. For example, NPR’s failing to call a lie a lie was a mistake in my view. Mary Louise Kelly explained “A lie is a false statement made with intent to deceive… Without the ability to peer into Donald Trump’s head, I can’t tell you what his intent was.”
I think the events of last week make that intent to deceive –– and win at all costs –– abundantly clear.
By contrast, the BBC, The New York Times and other mainstream outlets used the word “lie” when it was merited, countless times. Yet even some highly regarded colleagues inadvertently fueled the fire by demonstrating lazy journalism. On January 8th, the BBC’s North America editor, Jon Sopel’s retweet of Trump’s lies about a stolen election, without clearly flagging it as a lie, was a powerful case in point. A few hours later, Twitter finally gave Trump the red card he deserved months ago, but the damage was done. Sopel and those like him need to follow the plea of New York Times journalists like Sheera Frenkel and think carefully about how they use their powerful media megaphones.
Statements from other political elders like Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter and George W Bush are also worth reading. Which brings me to my latest BBC report.
When I read that Americans over 70 are showing remarkable resilience and optimism during this pandemic and lockdown, I thought, how can that be? We all know that the older you are, the more likely that Covid-19 can kill you, but here’s a fascinating statistic: in the United States, an 85 year-old grandmother who gets Covid is 10,000 times more at risk of death than her 15 year-old grandchildren. With odds like that, and the lockdown isolation you’d think that she’d be a lot more anxious and depressed than them, especially with the post-holiday spike in cases and prolonged lockdowns.
Instead, I discovered compelling research that demonstrates that the reverse is true. And found some valuable truths and life lessons for you and me.
Due to time constraints, the BBC wasn’t able to air all of the insights of the wise 19 year-old I interviewed, so I’m adding his wisdom at the end of this transcript and on the Fresh Dialogues podcast.
Riane Eisler is a grandmother of four, author, and President of the Center for Partnership Studies in Northern California. At 89, she’s energetic, busier than ever, and even optimistic about the immediate future.
Riane Eisler: Despite my age I’m still very very active doing online webinars, writing articles etc. Covid has not really changed my life that significantly. I’ve adjusted.
We tend to devalue our elders… Elders can be creative, active, and for me retirement is just… I don’t want to retire!
New research shows that although there are heightened levels of stress, anxiety and loneliness across all generations, older adults, like Eisler, are showing remarkable resilience, despite their forced isolation. Stanford University researchers surveyed almost 1000 Americans from 18 to 76 years-old in the early months of the lockdown.
Here’s Yochai Shavit, who co-authored the Stanford study.
Yochai Shavit: We found that older people reported feeling negative emotions less frequently and less intensely, and positive emotions more frequently and more intensely. Younger adults fared mostly worse than older adults.
Why was this?
Of course, it could be partly explained by the fact that younger adults are more likely to be directly and severely impacted by the pandemic’s economic and social fallout than older adults, especially retirees. But the study points to other reasons.
Yochai Shavit: As people age, they’re more motivated to find meaning and satisfaction in their present moment.So feeling joy becomes more important in older ages and worrying becomes less useful. When you have much of your life already lived, what we call limited time horizons, the future is just less of a priority and it becomes about what you choose to focus on.
Chris Campbell, a grandmother of four and retired attorney in Monterey County, agrees her time horizon contributes to her resilience.
Chris Campbell: I feel great today…It’s much easier when you’re in the last chapters of your life, as I am… to be in the moment and be very aware you have limited time left. To dilute or impair the time you have left with worry and anxiety is just so counterproductive. And I think that might be the secret to why we elderly people are perhaps not as stressed as younger people by this.
At 19 years of age, Luke Melcher is one of those stressed younger people. For his generation, there’s no apparent limit to the time horizon. But the opportunities at the start of their adult lives have been blocked by Covid’s restrictions – leaving many frustrated and angry he says.
Luke Melcher: I think a lot of kids felt cheated of very important years both academically and socially. We do all understand the significance of the virus but it’s a time when we are supposed to launching: going off to college or leaving college and going off into the real world. A lot of kids have been looking forward to this. It’s been hard for kids thinking that’ll never end. That’s what it feels like right now. It’s been going on for so long. It feels like it’s never going to stop.
Chris Campbell sympathises with how those much younger than her feel, even though the risk of death from Covid-19 is much higher for her age group.
Chris Campbell: There’s a collective sadness among many of us at the pain this virus has unleashed. Not just all the deaths, but the people whose livelihood has been destroyed and can’t feed their children.
So how do elders process that sadness and still nurture feelings of joy and pleasure? Yochai Shavit cites two key areas on which older people tend to focus to regulate their emotions:
Yochai Shavit: The first is emotionally close relationships become more of a priority… how they treat and approach these relationships: less confrontational, more forgiving, more generous to others. Making a positive social environment a priority.
The other thing is… when people of different ages are presented with stimuli that have positive and negative aspects, older adults tend to focus on the positive aspects, younger people on the negative aspects of things. Negative information is very useful in terms of evolutionary theory, when you have a long future ahead of you: it tells you what to avoid. (5min45secs elapsed at this point)
Kerstin Emerson of the University of Georgia adds some nuance to the correlation. During the spring lockdown, she surveyed the stress levels of about 800 people in two age groups: 60 to 70 year olds and 71 and older. She was surprised to find that, despite higher physical risk from Covid, 74% of the older group were “not that stressed,” compared to 56% of the younger group.
Emerson asked open-ended questions in her study and discovered these insights.
Kerstin Emerson: Lots of people worried for family members and society, but people remarked that this wasn’t the first time they’d gone through hard times… They know how to do this. They’re talking about resilience. By the time you’re 70 or 80 or 90, you’ve gone through some stuff. You have these coping mechanisms. I asked (them): how have your health behaviors changed since beginning social distancing? Some of them were the positive ones like exercising more, some were the less positive ones like drinking more, sleeping less, eating more.
The 70 plus were engaging in less of the negative health behaviors: less likely to drink more, eat more and sleep less. Their coping mechanisms were more positive: reading, taking walks… And being creative with our social connections, technology…
Some people who’re struggling emotionally are reframing 2020 as a gap year, giving themselves permission for all the missed deadlines, the lack of achievements or career advancement, or even employment.
Chris Campbell, now in her 8th decade, has this wisdom:
“My parents taught me: you have so little control over what happens to you and how other people behave. You have complete control over your reaction to it. That has become my mantra in my elderly years. I find it’s extremely powerful: I get to decide how I’m going to respond to the darkest days of the Trump administration, or a terrible pandemic… the pain and destruction that they brought.” Chris Campbell, retired attorney and grandma of four.
Riane Eisler has found a purpose in her writing and collaborations that sustains and energizes her. She frames the pandemic and lockdown in positive terms.
Riane Eisler: I think it’s a time for reflection on our personal lives and our social institutions. Look what it revealed about the lack of resilience… lack of justice in our economy. I’d advise people to try to be of service in some way… you can have zoom sessions with foster children, someone whose need you can help to meet…I think that can help us a great deal.
And what’s her advice for older people who don’t have access to the Internet?
Riane Eisler: Use what you’ve got which is the telephone. Voice can be very important: listening, listening to someone who perhaps needs to be heard, can be very healing really.
Maybe it’s time we all called our mothers, our fathers or an elderly relative or friend, to check in?
***
And here are some insights from 19 year-old Luke Melcher of Northern California, who speaks eloquently about the anger of his generation.
I started by asking him to rate the intensity of this frustration on a scale of zero to ten:
Luke Melcher: Fear of missing out on this time of my life would definitely be a ten because so much important stuff goes on when you’re a freshman in college, a senior in high school, so that I was very frustrated about… friends who didn’t get to do prom and graduation. In this time in our lives, we get control of our lives, we’re off to college, not in our parents’ homes, we can vote, we can drive. When something happens that’s out of our control, that pushes us back a couple of steps, then that’s where a lot of the anger comes from. A lot of adults are obviously settled. It’s easier for them, when Covid hit to be: it’s all good, we’re going to hunker down. A lot of kids felt they were cheated out on… very important years, both academically and socially. A lot of adults don’t put themselves in kids’ shoes. They don’t remember when they were launching off to college or launching off to jobs after college, and how painful that is to have to move back in with your parents and pause again.
Luke also shared some coping mechanisms that are working for him: things like intense workouts.
Luke Melcher: A lot of running and intense weight workouts, anything to get frustrations out… a time for me to escape and get a good sweat on… has helped so much. It made me not think about what’s going on in the world.
He’s even been meditating.
Luke Melcher: Sometimes I’d just be silent, especially when I was feeling a little depressed or angry I’d just sit and let the emotions come to me and just let them go….
***
Thank you for reading Fresh Dialogues. Let’s hope the next time we connect, Joe Biden will be our President and the majority of Americans –– honest, decent people –– will reject the violence of January 6th and unite behind our common goals and shared humanity. And let’s hope that Trump and his enablers will be held accountable for their misdeeds, and reforms put in place so that Trumpism doesn’t raise its ugly head ever again.
As Thomas Jefferson said: Truth is great and will prevail.
Finally: many thanks to the excellent production skills of the BBC’s Andrew Luck Baker who gave the report added gravitas by adding some musical flourishes.
This report is dedicated to my 95 year-old friend and fellow journalist, Elayne Wareing Fitzpatrick who inspired my research. She’s working on her final book titled Transforming Despair and told me last Fall: “I’ve never been happier in my life.”
Due to time constraints, the BBC wasn’t able to air all of the insights of the wise 19 year-old I interviewed, so I’m adding his wisdom at the end of this transcript and on the 
Finally: many thanks to the excellent production skills of the 
