So, recently I had to take two dead trees down. Normally I would have put on a flannel shirt and pair of jeans, donned my hard hat – it’s around here somewhere – and put my limited lumberjack skills to the test.

These trees, though, were located in our yard in such a way that a novice such as myself couldn’t possibly take them down safely.

I hired a tree service that not only gave me a great quote, but also came on time and quickly brought the trees down.

I was talking to one of the tree crew members and I quickly determined that his politics and my politics were probably at odds.  I’m pretty sure he realized that as well.

We spoke for a few minutes and he seemed like a good guy trying to get a handle on life in pandemic America. There were no raised voices. There was no swearing. Neither of us tossed an accusation at each other. There was no recitation of standard talking points.

It was just two bearded guys – I think I was the older one – having a conversation.

It made me feel very good. It was like the train trip I took several years ago to see my family in Virginia. My seatmate and I started talking and he identified himself as a Republican.

As we spoke it was clear that on certain subjects, such as healthcare, we had much more in common than we thought.

We decided that it was still possible for people to find common ground if they were predisposed to do so.

Now several years later I’m still clinging to that belief.

In my recent interview with Congressman Richard Neal (go to our website or to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IosIbaDNnM8) I asked him about the division that is seen in this country every day. Neal said he is concerned about it and said, “I think the amplification of conflict is with us 24 hours a day. Social media gins it up. I think the conspiracy theorist have invented their own conspiracies and theorized on them. I think the argument about vaccinations is quite apparent.

“But I also think as main stream media has shrunk, because of the cutback economically, there’s less context; less chance for media and reporters to provide the background on why something is happening so both sides go to the conflict of the story as opposed to the substance of the story.”

I can’t argue with any of that. There is less local media and less local media ownership. More and more news outlets are owned by hedge funds, for example, that care little for maintaining a free and healthy press.

I certainly believe in a free press but I also have to acknowledge that an unbiased and objective press did not emerge until the 1890s, thanks largely to journalist Walter Lippman who called for a “scientific method” in the collection of facts.

The “echo chamber” we hear so much about today is something that has had a long history in this country.

For decades, newspapers used to characterize by their political and social beliefs. They were blatant instruments that leveraged fear, hate and mistrust to increase readership and profits.

Now, we have TV channels and a large talk radio industry that uses the kind of tactics to build audience and profits, only this isn’t 1925, this is 2021.

The responsibility of social media to be some sort of watchdog against extremism is being examined and justifiably so.

Rather than seeing greater accountability in media, we are seeing less and less.

With all of this swirling in my head, I do take some comfort that two strangers of differing beliefs can indeed have a civil conversation and perhaps find some agreement.