Outrage Science Bites

Day 20 of our 30-day challenge, where we’re answering the most urgent questions about bridging our divides — gathered from people across the country at the Bridging Movement Summit.

We’ve talked a lot about the forces pushing us apart — outrage media, polarization, power dynamics. But today, we’re zeroing in on a hidden driver that often goes unnoticed: Our assumptions about each other.

Research shows that we tend to believe the “other side” hates us more than they actually do — and those exaggerated negative perceptions can do real damage. They lead us to disengage, distrust, and reject the possibility of common ground before the conversation even begins.

So today’s question:

How do overly negative perceptions of political rivals break down the work of bridging — both personally and across society?

To help us unpack that, we’re joined by James Coan from More Like Us, a project dedicated to revealing the true — and often surprising — beliefs that Americans hold about one another.

Learn more: OutrageOverload.net

Join the movement to lower the temperature: Count Me In for Calm

Day 19 of our 30-day NaPodPoMo challenge exploring how we bridge our divides.

As we enter the final stretch of this month-long journey, we’re focusing on the questions that are shaping the future of the bridging movement — the questions real people are asking as they look for ways to reconnect in an age of division.

Today we’re joined by Tim Jones, founder of Longer Tables, an initiative that brings people together over shared meals — not to debate or persuade, but to connect and be human together.

Tim tackles two big questions:

1️⃣ What’s the most important question on the minds of his participants?— the kinds of concerns are expressed by those participating in Longer Tables events.

2️⃣ What question does he believe the bridging movement needs to be asking next?— the invitation that may help us reimagine what community can feel like.

This double-header is all about curiosity, courage, and the belief that a conversation across differences can start with something as simple as a seat at the table.

Learn more: OutrageOverload.net

Join the movement to lower the temperature: Count Me In for Calm

Day 17 of our 30-day challenge exploring what it really takes to bridge our divides.

In this episode, we explore a promising shift in how we navigate conflict and polarization: the great reframing.

After spending more than two weeks unpacking the incentives driving outrage—misinformation, media dynamics, and our increasingly tribal political landscape—today we turn toward solutions.

The great reframing challenges the belief that the core of our national division lies in other people—their misinformation, their extremism, their intentions. Instead, this perspective asks us to recognize the role we each play: how our interactions, assumptions, and habitual “us vs. them” framing reinforce the very problem we want to solve.

Real change begins when we shift our own mindset. We can’t control the other side, but we can control how we show up in the conversation.

To help us unpack this transformative approach, we hear from Guy and Heidi Burgess of Beyond Intractability, who have spent decades studying conflict resolution and the root dynamics of polarization.

Learn more: OutrageOverload.net

Join the movement to lower the temperature: Count Me In for Calm

Day 17 of our 30-day challenge exploring what it really takes to bridge our divides.

Over the past couple of weeks, we’ve dug into some of the toughest barriers to connection—disinformation, power imbalances, high-stakes conversations, and what it means to be part of a shared civic community. But running underneath so many of these challenges is one force shaping our worldview every single day:

Social media.

The platforms we use—for news, for connection, for entertainment—are built on algorithms that reward drama, outrage, and negativity. They amplify the loudest voices, the hottest takes, and the most divisive content. And that can make real connection feel harder and harder, even when we genuinely want it.

So today’s question hits at the heart of the issue:

What are the dangers of constant social-media addiction, and how do platforms built on discord undermine genuine community?

To explore that, we’re joined by Calista Small, Research Manager at More in Common. Calista studies social cohesion, divides, and the forces that shape public perception. Her work uncovers how Americans see one another—and how we might rebuild trust in an online environment designed to erode it.

Learn more: OutrageOverload.net

Join the movement to lower the temperature: Count Me In for Calm

Day 16 of our 30-day challenge on bridging our divides.

For the first half of this series, we’ve been answering your questions about how we come together across differences — tackling topics like moving from talk to action, handling disinformation, navigating high-stakes conversations, and dealing with power imbalances.

Across all these conversations, one theme keeps resurfacing:our relationship to democracy and to one another.

It’s tempting to view division purely through a partisan lens.But a more powerful way to understand our divides may be through our civic identity — our shared rights, roles, and responsibilities as members of the same society.

If we’re going to bridge divides, we have to understand what it means to be a citizen in a fractured political environment.

So today, we’re shifting the format slightly to zoom in on that big idea:What is civic identity, and why does it matter so much for bridging?

To explore this, we hear from June Klees, a college civics professor who studies how young people understand and engage with their civic roles.

Learn more: OutrageOverload.net

Join the movement to lower the temperature: Count Me In for Calm

Day 15 of our 30-day challenge.

We’ve reached the halfway point in our deep dive into bridging divides — and today, we’re taking a short pause to reset, reflect, and reconnect.

To help me do that, I’ve invited a very special guest: my wife and co-host, Lisa, the real star of our weekly show This Week in Outrage.

Lisa joins me for a candid mid-challenge conversation about what it’s like living with (and occasionally debating with) someone who spends a lot of time thinking, talking, and podcasting about outrage and division.

It’s a lighter, more personal episode — a reminder that all this big talk about “bridging divides” really starts right at home.

Learn more: OutrageOverload.net

Join the movement to lower the temperature: Count Me In for Calm

Day 14 of our 30-day challenge—our ongoing exploration into the science and practice of bridging divides.

On Day 11, we spoke with Kira Hamman about one of the toughest challenges in bridging—how to build long bridges across vast differences in social, political, or economic power.Today, we revisit that essential question from another perspective.

How do you account for differential power dynamics in dialogue along the long bridges?

Our guest, Tania Israel, professor of counseling psychology and award-winning author, joins us to share how she approaches this problem.Tania brings insight into what it means to create genuine connection in spaces where imbalances exist—where listening, empathy, and structure can turn uneven ground into shared understanding.

Learn more: OutrageOverload.net

Join the movement to lower the temperature: Count Me In for Calm

Day 13 of our 30-day challenge exploring how we bridge our divides.

So far, we’ve talked about what bridging is, how to move from talk to action, and how to handle disinformation.Today, we’re taking that one step further — looking at a deeper, more stubborn challenge: conspiratorial thinking.

When someone embraces a conspiracy theory, it’s rarely just about facts. It’s about trust, belonging, and identity.If you try to challenge the idea head-on, it can feel like you’re not just questioning a belief — you’re threatening someone’s sense of who they are and where they belong.

So how do we bridge that gap? How do we engage without alienating or entrenching?

To help us unpack that, we’re joined by Melanie Trecek King, founder of Thinking is Power, who helps people understand how they know what they know.She shares insights on how to think more clearly about the claims we encounter every day — and how to foster curiosity instead of confrontation.

Learn more: OutrageOverload.net

Join the movement to lower the temperature: Count Me In for Calm

Day 12 of our 30-day challenge exploring what it really takes to bridge our divides.

Throughout this series, we’ve talked about how to disagree without being disagreeable and how to turn talk into action. On Day 6, we asked whether productive debate requires people to become more moderate.

Today, we’re revisiting that question through another lens — because not every disagreement is solved by compromise.

Can people with strong, even extreme, convictions still have productive, respectful conversations? Or do we have to meet in the middle to get along?

To help us unpack that, we’re joined by Tania Israel, professor of counseling psychology and award-winning author of Beyond Your Bubble and Facing the Fracture. Tania shares practical insights on how to stay true to your beliefs while keeping curiosity, empathy, and connection alive — even across deep divides.

Day 11 of our 30-day challenge, as we continue our deep dive into the complex world of bridging divides.

So far, we’ve talked about the fundamentals of bridging—how to move from conversation to action and how to address disinformation. But one of the biggest challenges remains: what happens when the two sides don’t come to the table with equal power?

When bridging divides between groups with vastly different levels of social, political, or economic power, it’s not enough to just say, “Let’s meet in the middle.” Sometimes the middle isn’t fair ground.

That takes us to today’s question:

How do you account for differential power dynamics in dialogue along the long bridges?

To explore that, we’ll hear from Kira Hamman of Urban Rural Action, who works directly with communities across the country to foster productive, equitable connections between people who don’t share the same experiences—or the same power.

Kira offers practical insights on how to design spaces where everyone’s voice is heard, respected, and valued—because true bridging means addressing imbalance, not ignoring it.