Spring 1995
Tapping the Hidden Layers of Civic Life
By Richard C. Harwood
and David Mermin
The Harwood Group
Davis (Buzz) Merritt, Jr., editor of the Wichita Eagle, calls it “the swamp.” It’s the invisible public life of communities — the informal web of interactions and public conversations that take place in the void between the “official world” of government and institutions and the every-day private lives of citizens.
Under the sponsorship of the Pew Center for Civic Journalism, The Harwood Group has been working with Merritt and reporters at the Eagle to explore and map that “swamp.” The goal is to understand the nature of those conversations and to learn how journalists can tap them for greater understanding and insight into the communities they cover and the concerns of their readers.
Over the last several months, Harwood Group researchers have been exploring the informal civic spaces in Wichita’s neighborhoods — looking and listening for where and how those residents talk together. From church basements to donut shops, park clean-ups to neighborhood groups, we have talked with citizens, probed their concerns and experiences, and listened in on the give and take of public conversation. We have also interviewed civic leaders, community activists, and public officials and conducted focus groups with residents.
By tracking various public concerns and issues as they worked their way through these neighborhoods, we have started to develop a “map” of civic life — an understanding of the interplay between citizens, organizations, public officials, and these civic spaces.
Among our findings so far:
- There are at least five distinct layers of civic spaces:
- “Official” spaces such as council meetings and public hearings.
- “Quasi-official” spaces such as neighborhood groups and civic clubs.
- “Third places” such as church socials and barber shops.
- “Incidental” conversations that occur on sidewalks or at the market.
- “Private” spaces in the home.
- Each layer has a distinct scale of operation, mix of participants, “rules of engagement,” strengths and weaknesses. Issues and concerns are dealt with in fundamentally different ways at different layers — yet all are important to civic life.
- Neighborhoods vary as to how robust different layers of civic life are and whether certain types of civic spaces exist at all.
- In many places, the layers of civic life are in decline — squeezed out by the increased pace of life, social isolation, and fear that afflict the country as a whole. Yet there still are layers of public conversation in many communities that can be tapped.
- In most communities there are major disconnects and gaps between layers. These disconnections fragment civic life and impede meaningful dialogue among citizens and between citizens and institutions. The nature of these disconnects varies from community to community.
- All five layers of civic life have some value to reporters, but the types of information and insights available at each layer are distinctive. Different strategies and different ways of listening are required for different layers.
The research so far presents a challenge and an opportunity for newspapers and other media. It is clear that despite widespread community fragmentation and isolation, a rich informal network of public conversation still exists. But to understand and tap that network in a particular community, journalists must learn which layers are thriving, which are missing or disconnected, and how citizens interact with these civic spaces.
These conversations are a hidden resource. Reporters and editors who know how to tap them effectively can gain a perspective on public concerns and issues that is simply unavailable either from “official sources” or “person in the street” interviews. By reflecting a deeper understanding of the community it serves, a newspaper which enriches its coverage in this way becomes a catalyst for readers, helping them to reconnect to each other and to their community.
To take advantage of this opportunity, newspapers need to:
- Make a commitment to rediscover and explore the hidden layers of civic spaces in their community — and to make that exploration a regular part of how news is gathered and covered.
- Apply a different “lens” to what we hear in those civic spaces. The nature of public conversation varies from layer to layer and neighborhood to neighborhood; reporters need to understand what kinds of spaces exist, what can be learned in different spaces, and how to listen for it.
- Learn how to process what we hear over time. Exploring civic spaces is not worth the effort if all we seek is colorful quotes. Their real value to a newspaper unfolds through a gradual recognition of how people in different communities work through their concerns and make connections between those concerns and public issues.
- Work to reflect what we learn in the newspaper — in how stories are chosen, how they are framed, the language used, the sources they quote, the concerns they address. Stories that reflect a deeper understanding of civic life are more likely to “ring true” to readers and to capture their imagination.
This research suggests that newspapers that tap into public conversations and write these kinds of stories will actually help to breathe new life into the civic spaces of their communities. Newspapers can act as connective tissue between the fragmented layers of civic life, helping to stimulate a reinvigorated public dialogue and a more engaged citizenry.
As we work with Merritt and his reporters to integrate these findings into their daily work, we will start to build a set of hands-on “tools” that can be used in other cities. To learn more, contact Merritt at 316-268-6555 or The Harwood Group at 301-656-3669.
Harwood is president and Mermin is a project manager at the Bethesda, Md., public issues research.
