Tuesday, April 16

Dear Reader,

Dot was recently in a conversation with someone with whose views I disagreed … and I was struggling to find a way to open their mind even a crack. It’s frustrating, particularly when the other person’s point of view is … wrong. I don’t mean wrong as in different than what I think; I mean wrong as in factually incorrect.

That was the case for a group of concerned citizens in rural British Columbia who were stymied by a small community that refused to commit to renewable energy. At least … until the group hit on the idea of “deep canvassing.” 

Deep canvassing is a non-judgmental way of soliciting views around an issue and then asking follow-up questions to go deeper, explains Ella Barrett of the New Conversation Initiative. “The goal is to sit in that conflicted place with a person and just be curious,” she says. 

“It’s long been considered difficult to change someone else’s beliefs,” Bluedot contributor Diane Selkirk writes. “There's plenty of research describing the backfire effect: a response that happens when we’re confronted with factual information and, rather than swaying us, it leads us to increase the strength of our opposing belief. But contrary to traditional canvassing — which can trigger this effect — studies show that something quite different happens with deep canvassing.” What happened was that it worked! 

And it’s working in California, reports Bill McKibben, who writes in his newsletter that, “In California, my amazing Third Act colleagues are doing lots of what’s called “deep canvassing” with voters in the run up to this year’s election. This means long, real talks at the doorstep. … If you want to try it out, we have lots of opportunities for this kind of work at ThirdAct.org.”

Persuasively,

Dot