Luis Cruz: Welcome to “San Diego News Fix: The Backstory,” where we tackle important questions about journalism ethics and give you a behind-the-scenes look at our industry and our newsroom.
Today we’re talking about the Union-Tribune Community Voices Project. It’s an online platform for civil discourse. It brings dozens of thought leaders together with the goal of sharing diverse points of view to move toward a stronger, more inclusive San Diego region. ing us to discuss the Community Voices Project are Union-Tribune editorial and opinion director Matthew T. Hall, deputy editorial and opinion editor Laura Castañeda, managing editor Lora Cicalo, and we begin with publisher and editor Jeff Light.
Jeff Light: Thank you, Luis. And let’s jump right in. This is one of my favorite topics because it’s one of the most important things we do, in my opinion. Matthew, why don’t you just start us off with what is the Community Voices Project? How long have we been doing it? Why did we start it?
Matthew Hall: Like you, I agree it’s one of the most important things that the opinion team does, and one of the reasons that it was born is because one of my great frustrations when I took over as head of the opinion team in 2016 was that the opinion page is exactly what it has been for decades, for centuries – which is, we largely tell people how long they can write, when they write, how frequently they write, what subjects they tackle. We’re the ones soliciting subjects, and that’s not the way to have a conversation, right?
So, a couple of years after I came on board, Jeff, you and I started having conversations about how to bring more voices to the table, how to amplify voices – particularly marginalized voices. And so we launched the Community Voices Project, almost three years ago to the day. We began it in May 2020. We featured dozens of writers, and we tried to get a great diversity of writers all over San Diego – geographically – diverse in of race and gender and identity, in of political persuasion, in of what they did for livings, and instead of saying, “You can write an essay of 750 words every three months on subject X,” we said, “You can write about anything you want at any length at any time.”
The idea, again, was to start broader conversations, to let people tell their own stories and to really be able to understand our neighbors. And I think we had great success, especially at the beginning, people wrote frequently and we published their essays, mostly online but sometimes in the paper, and had really, really powerful conversations about any number of subjects.
In recent times, the frequency with which writers are producing essays has downshifted, and so Laura and I were trying to reboot it now. In recent months, we’ve invited more folks; we’ve asked folks who haven’t been writing as much or at all if they want to give a seat to someone who is on a long waiting list that we’ve had. So we’re trying to reboot it now and also having great success, and the two main areas where we’re trying to find more people are young voices and conservative voices, both of which we’ve had in the past but maybe have been underrepresented in the group. And so as we look to bring in more folks at the current time, we’re also focusing in on those two key areas.
Jeff Light: Let me bring in Laura Castañeda because you’re the one with your hands on this on an every-hour basis. And, I think I’ve shared before, as I go through that work every week, I’m just always amazed at the amazing stories and the surprises and the insights and the emotion. I just think it’s a fantastic project. Tell us a little bit about what it’s like making that happen. How do you find these people? What is the work of finding and encouraging this kind of storytelling?
Laura Castañeda: There is no one answer; it comes from so many places. This project is brilliant. And you came up with this before I came on board, so I will take no credit. We receive dozens of essays every single day that just come in, that we don’t even ask for. But every once in a while, a writer will catch our attention because it’s a younger person or they’re just writing about something that I would say to myself, “I’ve been in San Diego for 20-something years and I didn’t know that. I’ve never heard of that.” That means that that person is in tune to a community or a circle of people or something that we obviously don’t know about. So they’re like the boots on the ground; they’re the eyes and ears in the community. And they’re very ionate about the subjects that they want to write about.
So, sometimes they come from those nonsolicited essays. We just added a woman who is a psychiatrist or a psychologist, she lives in Bonita, she is Jewish, and she just has all of these amazing different pockets in life she wrote about in her little bio and I’m like, “Oh my gosh. She can write on a multitude of subjects.” So, they don’t necessarily have to be people that have a community-leading type of title, but they’re bringing something to the table that we obviously don’t know about and should be sharing with the community at large.
I think that’s the beauty of this. There’s not just one place we’re finding our Community Voices people; they’re coming from all over the place and even through recommendations from those who have decided that they don’t have the time or they’re ready to kind of move on but they’ve recommended other people.
Jeff Light: OK. Now we’re sort of getting to the brass tacks here. How do you decide who gets to be in that club?
Laura Castañeda: A lot of talking.
Jeff Light: Yes. I know you two are working on this right now, figuring out what other voices to enroll.
Matthew Hall: Our criteria is pretty broad, expansive, kind of intentionally so. We want people with a ion to speak out, with experiences that they are willing to share, who know their communities – however they define their communities – able to write on a regular basis, willing to undergo what can be a rigorous editing process. These pieces are opinion based, but they also need to be fact based, too, because this is journalism after all. And I think this is key, too, that they disclose any potential conflicts of interest.
As we were going through this reboot, we looked at our last set of criteria and we upgraded it to for that – possible conflicts of interest – because journalism is only as good as the people who trust it. And one of the things that this is not is a forum for endorsements, for overtly political statements by people in office, or who work for politicians or who are of the Democratic or Republican Party. We’ve got to look at those criteria and then look at the group, which is on our website and you can google Community Voices Project/Union-Tribune and you’ll see the dozens of folks who are writing for us currently. So we look at that group and see which holes we have.
Like I said earlier, young voices and conservative voices had been some of the ones where we thought we needed some more representation. I think we’ve got a lot of young voices now, too, and we’re bringing in more conservative voices. There’s no magic to it, and it is a little subjective, to be honest. It’s not really about checking boxes, but about trying to have really thoughtful conversation and, importantly, a way to disagree agreeably, which I think is a big part of it, too.
Jeff Light: And how big is this group? How many people?
Matthew Hall: I think right now it’s about 50 to 60. The ideal is we want to expand it. It can’t get super huge because there’s limited staff. Right now, Laura, I, and Tania Navarro edit the pieces and sometimes other teammates have an eye on it as well. So we’re kind of limited, to a certain extent, by all the stuff we do and are able to do, but our goal is to publish essays the week that they come in, so that there’s always something for people to read in that section.
Jeff Light: So let’s talk about this from an industry perspective. Matt, just before we got on we were chatting about this. I feel like I see two different trends in the industry – one toward embracing and centering more voices, like you are here, and then another that is cautious about which voices are included in an age of rising propaganda and maybe also rising political orthodoxy, maybe on both sides, where people are feeling like, “Is it responsible to hear all voices?” Tell me a little bit about your industry view. What do you hear and see from peers, etc.?
Matthew Hall: The timing on this is interesting because I just got back from Austin last week where there were 60 opinion journalism leaders from all over the country. The American Press Institute brought us together for a two-day opinion journalism summit. And one of my key takeaways there was this notion that we’re all trying to “exist in the tension,” which was a phrase that someone had and it kind of illustrates what you’re talking about, which is we are trying to amplify more voices, but we’re so divided that depending on which side of the political aisle you’re on, you may not think that some of those voices deserve to have a seat at the table.
The other big takeaway I had – and one of the big takeaways from the summit – was the notion that at its heart, at its core, opinion journalism is really trying to figure out how we all live better lives and govern ourselves better. With that in mind, the idea is not to change people’s views but to change people’s views of each other. Meaning, if we’re all trying to understand one another, that’s where that that focus should be. And that’s really the idea at the heart of the Community Voices Project. And I think what you’re starting to see, nationally, is more people embrace that, more people trying to figure out how to have those discussions.
I think three years ago, we were kind of at the forefront, but I think there’s more people interested in this and pursuing it. And now we’re trying to figure out and having to have discussions about the business of journalism. One thing I’ll note is that all of these essays are in front of the Union-Tribune’s pretty restrictive paywall, so they’re free and accessible to everyone, which I think is essential. We’re not paying these writers; we’re providing them a platform. But these essays aren’t behind our paywall; we’re not trying to profit off of other people’s stories. And I think that’s important too.
I keep talking about this this summit, but there were so many amazing people there and amazing thoughts that emerged from it. One of which was this notion of extracting stories from a community. Journalism is very famous for being extractors. We’re going to swoop in, we’re going to talk to you for an hour, we’re going to put 10 words of what you told us in a quote in our much longer, broader story, and so that’s an extraction, right? That’s a transaction. The beauty of the Community Voices Project is that it’s not transactional. We really are trying to listen to what people are saying, not just as editors, but as a community. And that is, I think, the ultimate goal of this is that we have an understanding, that other outlets are understanding, that the question to ask yourself at the end of each story that you read is, “What did you learn from it, from hearing another perspective?” I think that some self-reflection and some community reflection is really the point of this and why other outlets are seeing the value and more and more outlets are doing it.
Jeff Light: Yes, that’s a very interesting dynamic because, yes, “I want to control my story on my and tell it in my own voice, and when I talk to a journalist, my story is framed into the construct that that journalist thinks is right. And my words are selected and the context is shaped in a way that I may or may not agree with.” So there’s something interesting going on here, though. By giving agency to the writer, they control that entire framework, which is certainly empowering to them.
I think the argument on the other side would be the journalist feels that they’re bringing a third-party distance and an objective view that can bring together disparate points of view within a factual context, which might be missing in some of this work. So I think that that’s probably a tension.
Laura Castañeda, as a longtime journalist, I’m sure you think about these things every day. What are your thoughts about this end of the journalism world – finding people’s voices, giving voice to people –versus the work you did for years as a reporter – framing up people’s stories into, in your case, broadcast television?
Laura Castañeda: Well, there’s a big difference to be able to speak to somebody, get a quote, or encourage them to write a commentary or a piece like this than putting a camera in their face, convincing them that, “It’s all cool. Just let me put this camera in your face.” It’s very intimidating, right? It’s a different ballgame. But I think the beauty of this is that it’s their voice. It’s theirs – however long they want it to be, and we always tell them there’ll be light editing, but we’re not trying to change what you’re saying. We’re just editing for grammar and for AP style. And it’s trust. It’s building trust with some of these folks that they are actually being invited to the table, which they’re not used to that.
Back in the day, when I first got here, I was a stranger in this land and in the Southwest, and so I had to really start from the bottom and build trust before you can build your Rolodex, if you will, your list as a reporter. People are not just going to open the door and let you in whether you’re on television or not, or whether you have a great byline or you’ve been here for a long time. It’s really building that trust and assuring them that you are interested in letting them have this platform.
We have invited people into this circle in this Community Voices Project that were hesitant at the beginning – inviting people from the LGBTQ community or the trans community and assuring them that we really do want to hear what you have to say, inviting people across the border that live in Tijuana and saying, “You’re a part of this community and this region.” It’s really building the trust, inviting them, encouraging them to write.
It sounds really easy at the beginning – “We want you to write. We want to invite you. Just write as often as you can” – but people are busy, and we’ve had to go back on this cycle – as we’re getting ready to extend more invitations – to probably a dozen people who haven’t written in a very long time and say, “You know, are you still interested in being a part of it?” It’s not that they’re not; people just get really busy, and when someone initially invites you to be a part of something, it sounds so great and you want to be a part of it. But then you realize that it does take a lot of time to do that.
Jeff Light: And, I will say, as the editor and publisher of the Union-Tribune, the legacy of whose voices are heard in our report is very deeply imprinted in the community. I know this both objectively from audits we’ve done of our work – who are our sources, who is quoted in stories in our report – and then historically, the reputation of who the Union-Tribune, as an institution, has valued and prioritized is pretty powerfully imprinted in this community. And I want to commend both of you for the amazing work that you’ve done in trying to change that, and doing more than trying, in changing that. I think it’s really important work that you’re both doing.
Lora Cicalo, I wanted to give you the final question here; you always get the hardest question in these podcasts. As the managing editor, this issue of whose voices are heard is something that, obviously, is not just seen on the editorial pages or in the Community Voices Project every day, it’s seen in every story we do. And it’s a pretty consequential issue, because I think that there are voices that should not be heard for all sorts of reasons. And that leaves a lot of power and discretion to the individual journalist. How do we guide our journalists at the Union-Tribune about who should be in their stories?
Lora Cicalo: As Matt and Laura were talking, I was thinking that, fundamentally, in both parts of our work, it comes down to who we know. Our sources are the people that we know and that we talk with and that we’ve built relationships with. And it was interesting as Matt was talking about the criteria, I was thinking how different, historically, it has been on the news side. Matt was saying their criteria for who is included is exceptionally broad and they’re not looking to check boxes. Traditionally, that has been the opposite on the news side. The aperture is very narrow, and we are looking to check boxes – we’re looking for particular people, often with particular expertise, to talk on an issue.
I think one of the guidelines that we have given folks is to think more broadly about who is an expert on a particular issue or policy or topic in our community, and also to think about who is most affected by whatever it is that we’re writing about.
As you mentioned, several years ago we did an audit and that audit of our sources was revealing in some surprising and not-so-surprising ways. It was overwhelmingly showing that our sources tend to be the establishment and the establishment, by definition, was White males of a certain age, and I think whether we’re looking for experts in government or academia or the medical field, reporters have traditionally gone to the folks that they know or that are willing to talk to them at the drop of a hat, and that has really limited the diversity of our sources over time.
So I think there’s important work being done to encourage people to spend the time in the community building those relationships, as Laura was saying, building that trust over time, so that we have a large, very diverse source list that’s helping to inform our work.
Jeff Light: Yes. Good answer to a very difficult question. You know, I was just looking on our website at our own criteria around sources and what we’ve listed here — some of those boxes that we’re checking that you’re talking about – who do we include. Among the criteria we consider when evaluating a group or individual are authority, knowledge, relevance, endorsement or referral from reputable, trusted sources and credibility. Tests for credibility would include hip of the group, tradition, academic standing, political influence, honesty and integrity. And who we leave out? I mentioned that not all voices need to be heard. So lack of veracity – people who misguide or lie, we don’t want them in our stories; I don’t think that’s helpful. Lack of transparency – in other words, cloaking a hidden interest or self-interest – bigotry, law breaking or hate speech.
So, a pretty big topic. And another one that just came up in a story we were talking about recently: There’s a sort of an inverse way that you can put your finger on the scale in a story by including a very poor spokesman for one of the points of view. Find an outlandish or discredited character and have them be the voice for the unpopular point of view, to make it an object of scorn. That’s another way that sources can be misused. So very complicated business and probably more podcasts to come on this topic.
Matthew Hall: May I jump in with a real-world example? This discussion has been great; I appreciate discussing this issue, but we didn’t really give a real-world example and I will say in Sunday’s and Monday’s Union-Tribune we will be publishing eight essays from Community Voices Project about homelessness.
Now, we’ve all heard a lot about homeless policy in recent years. But these essays are really great because they, to the point of this discussion, are really diverse. One person spent time in a homeless shelter in North County, a high school sophomore went to talk to homeless people in Chula Vista. There’s geographic diversity, there’s political diversity, there’s a progressive and a conservative viewpoint. And these essays, collectively, are really powerful, and I hope they do make people think on a subject that we’ve talked about so much that sometimes our eyes can glaze over as we’re having these complicated discussions about homelessness policy. But I think if readers want a real-world example about what we’re talking about, those eight essays go a long way to underscoring that.
Laura Castañeda: And I just wanted to add one thing. I don’t want our audience or readers to be confused. We still accept regular commentaries from anybody who wants to submit one. So this is not saying, “Oh, no, your commentary is not welcome.” This is just a special project that the Union-Tribune has very proudly launched and is ongoing. So please don’t be confused. We will gladly still receive your nonsolicited commentaries.
Luis Cruz: Thank you very much, Jeff, Lora, Laura and Matt. To learn more about our Community Voices Project, log on to sandiegouniontribune.com/community-voices-project
