演讲MP3+双语文稿:如何引导持不同意见的人展开对话
听力课堂TED音频栏目主要包括TED演讲的音频MP3及中英双语文稿，供各位英语爱好者学习使用。本文主要内容为演讲MP3+双语文稿:如何引导持不同意见的人展开对话，希望你会喜欢！
【演讲者及介绍】Eve Pearlman
伊芙·皮尔曼，一位新闻创新者、公共演说家、作家和思想领袖。作为一名终身记者，她致力于为社区服务和建设社区。
【演讲主题】如何引导持不同意见的人之间的对话
【中英文字幕】
翻译 psjmz mz 校对 Jin Ge
00:01
So in the run-up to the 2016 election, Iwas, like most of us, watching the rise in discord and vitriol and nastiness inour public spaces. It was this crazy uptick in polarization. It was bothdisheartening and distressing. And so I started thinking, with a fellowjournalist, Jeremy Hay, about how we might practice our craft differently. Howwe might go to the heart of divides, to places of conflict, like journalistsalways have, but then, once there, do something really different. We knew wewanted to take the core tools of our craft -- careful vetting of information,diligent research, curiosity, a commitment to serving the public good -- toserving our democracy -- and do something new. And so we mapped out thisprocess, what we call dialogue journalism, for going to the heart of social andpolitical divides, and then, once there, building journalism-supportedconversations between people on opposite sides of polarizing issues.
在2016年大选的准备阶段，我和大多数人一样，看到公众空间中越来越多的不和，刻薄和肮脏。这是两极分化的疯狂升级。既令人沮丧又让人苦恼。于是，我开始和一位名叫杰里米·海伊的记者一起思考如何用不同的方式应用我们的技巧。如何才能像记者们经常做的那样，涉足分歧的中心，到达冲突的地方。而一旦到了那里，做一些真正不同的事情。我们知道我们想要用核心技巧——认真审查资料，勤奋研究，充满好奇，对公共利益的承诺——去服务我们的民主——去做新的事情。于是我们想出了这个项目，我们称之为对话新闻，去触及社会和政治分歧的核心，一旦到了那一步，就可以在对立的两派之间建立起由新闻业支持的对话。
01:03
But how actually to do this in a worldthat's so divided, so deeply divided -- when we live in a world in whichcousins and aunts and uncles can't talk to one another, when we often live inseparate and distinct news ecosystems, and when we reflexively and habituallymalign and dismiss those with whom we disagree? But we wanted to try. And soright after the 2016 election, in that time between the election and theinauguration, we partnered with the Alabama Media Group to do something reallydifferent. We brought 25 Trump supporters from Alabama together in conversationwith 25 Clinton supporters from California. And we brought them together in aclosed, moderated Facebook group that we kept open for a month. What we wantedto do was to give them a place to engage with genuine curiosity and openness.And we wanted to support them in building relationships, not just with eachother but with us as journalists. And then we wanted to supply facts andinformation -- facts and information that they could actually receive and processand use to undergird their conversations.
但如何在如此分裂，裂痕如此之深的世界中去做这样的事？ 当我们所处的世界 堂兄弟姐妹和他们的 父母不彼此交谈，当我们常常生活在隔离 和不同的新闻生态系统中，并且当我们反射性地、习惯性地诋毁 和排斥那些与我们意见相左的人？ 但我们仍想要试试。于是在2016年大选后，在选举和就职典礼之间那段时间，我们和阿拉巴马媒体集团合作，做了一些非常不同的事情。我们从阿拉巴马带来了 25位川普的支持者，与来自加州的25位希拉里·克林顿的支持者进行对话。我们把他们放到一个封闭的有管理员的Facebook群组上，观察了一个月。我们想要做的是给他们一个场所，保持真诚的好奇和开放态度。并且我们想要帮助他们建立关系，不仅在他们之间，并且和我们记者之间。然后我们想要提供事实和信息，让他们可以节接受和思考，并可以用来增强他们的谈资。
02:13
And so as a prelude to this conversation,the first step in what we call dialogue journalism, we asked what they thoughtthe other side thought of them. So when we asked the Trump supporters fromAlabama what they thought the Clinton supporters in California thought of them,this is some of what they said. "They think we are religious Biblethumpers." "That we're backwards and hickish, and stupid.""They think that we all have Confederate flags in our yards, that we'reracist and sexist and uneducated." "They think we're barefoot andpregnant, with dirt driveways." "And they think we're all prissybutts and that we walk around in hoop skirts with cotton fields in thebackground."
作为这次对话的引子，这个我们称之为对话新闻的第一步，我们询问他们认为对方会如何看待他们。当我们问阿拉巴马的川普支持者加州的希拉里支持者如何看待他们时，他们是这样说的：“他们认为我们是狂热的宗教信徒。”“我们是落后愚蠢的乡巴佬。”“他们认为我们的院子里都是南方联盟的旗帜，我们是种族主义者，性别歧视者，没受过教育。”“他们觉得在尘土飞扬的马路上经常能看到赤脚和怀孕的人。”“他们认为我们都是乡巴佬，穿着箍裙在棉花田中四处走动。”
02:53
And then we asked that same question of theCalifornians: "What do you think the Alabamians think about you?" Andthey said this: "That we're crazy, liberal Californians." "Thatwe're not patriotic." "We're snobby and we're elitist.""We're godless and we're permissive with our children." "Andthat we're focused on our careers, not our family." "That we'reelitist, pie-in-the-sky intellectuals, rich people, Whole Foods-eating, very outof touch."
然后我们对加州的人问了同样的问题：“你们认为阿拉巴马的人会怎么看你们？”他们是这么说的：“我们是疯狂的，自由的加州人。”“我们不爱国。”“我们势利，我们是所谓的精英。”“我们不信神，我们对孩子放任自由。”“我们关注工作，而不是家庭。”“我们是精英主义者、空想家、有钱人、全食主义者，非常脱节。”
03:19
So by asking questions like this at thestart of every conversation and by identifying and sharing stereotypes, we findthat people -- people on all sides -- begin to see the simplistic and oftenmean-spirited caricatures they carry. And in that -- after that, we can moveinto a process of genuine conversation.
所以通过在每次对话前问这样的问题，通过识别和分享刻板印象，我们发现人们——两边的人——开始看到他们所携带的印象往往是简单且刻薄的。在这之后，我们开始了真正的对话。
03:40
So in the two years since that launch --California/Alabama Project -- we've gone on to host dialogues and partnershipswith media organizations across the country. And they've been about some of ourmost contentious issues: guns, immigration, race, education. And what we found,remarkably, is that real dialogue is in fact possible. And that when given achance and structure around doing so, many, not all, but many of our fellow citizensare eager to engage with the other.
在加州/阿拉巴马项目发起的两年后——我们继续与全国各地的媒体组织举办对话和开展合作。他们一直在讨论一些最有争议的话题：枪支，移民，种族，教育。我们发现，很明显，真正的对话实际上是可能的。当有机会按这样的组织结构去做时，很多，虽然不是全部，但我们的很多公民非常渴望彼此互动。
04:12
Too often journalists have sharpeneddivides in the name of drama or readership or in service to our own views. Andtoo often we've gone to each side quoting a partisan voice on one side and apartisan voice on the other with a telling anecdotal lead and a pithy finalquote, all of which readers are keen to mine for bias. But our dialogue-basedprocess has a slower pace and a different center. And our work is guided by theprinciple that dialogue across difference is essential to a functioningdemocracy, and that journalism and journalists have a multifaceted role t记者常常激化分歧，以因为戏剧化，迎合读者口味 或做出一些主观臆断更吸引眼球。我们常常站在两派的立场上，一边引用一个党派的声音，另一边引用另一个党派的声音，并加上轶事式的开场和精辟的结束语，所有的读者都热衷于挖掘偏见。但是，我们基于对话的过程节奏较慢，而且主题繁杂。我们的工作是基于这个原则：直面差异的对话对民主很关键，新闻业和记者可以发挥多方面的作用进行支持。o play in supporting that.
04:51
So how do we work? At every stage, we're astransparent as possible about our methods and our motives. At every stage, wetake time to answer people's questions -- explain why we're doing what we'redoing. We tell people that it's not a trap: no one's there to tell you you're stupid,no one's there to tell you your experience doesn't matter. And we always askfor a really different sort of behavior, a repatterning away from the reflexivename-calling, so entrenched in our discourse that most of us, on all sides,don't even notice it anymore.
那么我们究竟是如何运作的？在每个环节，我们都尽可能地公开我们的方法和我们的动机。在每个环节，我们都抽时间回答人们的问题——解释我们为什么做，在做什么。我们告诉人们，不要担心：这里没人会说你很蠢，这里没人会说你的经历不重要。我们总是要求一种完全不同的行为，避开习惯性的反身谩骂，这我们的语境中是如此根深蒂固，以至于所有阵营中的大多数人甚至都没有注意到它。
05:25
So people often come into our conversationsa bit angrily. They say things like, "How can you believe X?" and"How can you read Y?" and "Can you believe that thishappened?" But generally, in this miracle that delights us every time,people begin to introduce themselves. And they begin to explain who they areand where they come from, and they begin to ask questions of one another. Andslowly, over time, people circle back again and again to difficult topics, eachtime with a little more empathy, a little more nuance, a little more curiosity.And our journalists and moderators work really hard to support this becauseit's not a debate, it's not a battle, it's not a Sunday morning talk show. It'snot the flinging of talking points. It's not the stacking of memes and gifs orarticles with headlines that prove a point. And it's not about scoringpolitical victories with question traps.
人们参与我们的对话时往往都有些气愤。他们往往带着这样的口吻：“你怎么会相信张三？”和“你怎么会相信那种鬼话？”以及“太让人难以置信了！”但总的来说，在这个每次都让我们兴奋不已的奇迹中，人们开始介绍他们自己。他们开始解释自己是谁，来自哪里，并且开始相互问问题。慢慢的，随着时间推移，人们循环参与不同的话题，每次都会更富有同理心，抓住更多的细微差异，更好奇。我们的记者和主持人在努力提供支持，因为这不是辩论，不是战争，这不是周日早间脱口秀。不是卖弄词藻，更不应该用堆满表情包和动图或者带标题的文章来证明自己的观点。这不是用问题陷阱赢得政治胜利的套路。
06:19
So what we've learned is that our state ofdiscord is bad for everyone. It is a deeply unhappy state of being. And peopletell us this again and again. They say they appreciate the chance to engagerespectfully, with curiosity and with openness, and that they're glad andrelieved for a chance to put down their arms. And so we do our work in directchallenge to the political climate in our country right now, and we do itknowing that it is difficult, challenging work to hold and support people inopposing backgrounds in conversation. And we do it knowing democracy depends onour ability to address our shared problems together. And we do this work byputting community at the heart of our journalistic process, by putting our egosto the side to listen first, to listen deeply, to listen around and through ourown biases, our own habits of thought, and to support others in doing the same.And we do this work knowing that journalism as an institution is struggling,and that it has always had a role to play and will continue to have a role toplay in supporting the exchange of ideas and views.
所以我们了解到，不和谐状态对所有人都是坏事。这种状态让所有人都感到沮丧。人们一再告诉我们这点。他们说，他们很感激有机会以尊重、好奇和开放的态度参与进来，他们为有机会放下戒备而感到高兴和宽慰。因此，我们的工作是直接挑战我国内目前的政治气候，我们知道去举办和支持不同背景的人对话这是一项困难而有挑战性的工作。我们知道民主取决于我们一起解决共同问题的能力。我们做这个工作是通过把社群放在我们新闻过程的中心，通过把自我先放在一边，先倾听，认真倾听，倾听周围的声音，通过我们的偏见，我们自己的思维习惯，并且支持别人也这样做。我们在行动的时候就知道新闻业面对这个问题一直很挣扎，它一直需要扮演，并且要继续扮演支持交换意见和观点的角色。
07:28
For many of the participants in our groups,there are lasting reverberations. Many people have become Facebook friends andin-real-life friends too, across political lines. After we closed that firstTrump/Clinton project, about two-thirds of the women went on to form their ownFacebook group and they chose a moderator from each state and they continue totalk about difficult and challenging issues. People tell us again and againthat they're grateful for the opportunity to be a part of this work, gratefulto know that people on the other side aren't crazy, grateful that they've had achance to connect with people they wouldn't have otherwise talked to.
对我们队伍中的许多参与者而言，这产生了持续的影响。很多人成为了Facebook的好友和现实中的好友，跨越了政治的边界。在我们关掉第一个川普/希拉里项目后，大约2/3的女性，开设了她们自己的Facebook群组，并且她们从每个州选了个主持人去继续讨论分歧和具有挑战的问题。人们一次又一次地告诉我们，他们很感激有这个机会成为这个项目中的一部分，很庆幸知道另一边的人并非不可理喻，很高兴他们有机会能够跟可能永远都不会去交流的人建立联系。
08:04
A lot of what we've seen and learned,despite the fact that we call ourselves Spaceship Media, is not at all rocketscience. If you call people names, if you label them, if you insult them, theyare not inclined to listen to you. Snark doesn't help, shame doesn't help,condescension doesn't help. Genuine communication takes practice and effort andrestraint and self-awareness. There isn't an algorithm to solve where we are.Because real human connection is in fact real human connection. So lead withcuriosity, emphasize discussion not debate, get out of your silo, because realconnection across difference ... this is a salve that our democracy sorelyneeds.
尽管我们称自己为宇宙飞船媒体，但我们看到和学到的很多东西，并不是什么高深的学问。如果你对人出言不逊，如果你给他们贴上标签，如果你侮辱他们，他们就会倾向于对你置之不理。恶声恶语帮不上忙，羞耻感没有用，态度傲慢无更是雪上加霜。真正的沟通需要练习、努力、克制和自我觉悟。没有一个算法可以解决我们现在的处境。因为真正的人际关系就是人际关系。所以以好奇为指引，强调讨论而非争执，避免坐井观天，因为跨越分歧的真正连接——正是我们民主迫切需要的一剂强心针。
08:52
Thank you.
谢谢。
08:53
(Applause)
（鼓掌）
