Idea 1: Cross-Pollinating News Feeds

The first step in breaking out of the misinformation loop is to introduce diverse perspectives in a non-confrontational way. One of the easiest and least threatening ways to do this is through cross-pollinating news feeds—a simple agreement where both you and the person you disagree with add 2-3 news sources you wouldn’t normally consume.

How to Introduce the Idea:

You can start with curiosity, not confrontation. Instead of saying, “Your news sources are biased,” frame it as a shared experiment:
“I know we don’t always see eye to eye, but I think it’d be interesting to mix up our news a little. What if we both added a couple of sources we wouldn’t normally read? I’ll check out what you suggest, and you check out what I suggest. Just to get a broader view.”
Make it reciprocal. Offer to add Fox News, OAN, or a source they trust—but in return, they agree to add NPR, CNN, or BBC. The key is that neither of you dismiss the other’s sources outright.
Set small, realistic expectations. Encourage them to click on these sources occasionally—not to agree with everything, but to see what other perspectives exist. Similarly, you should also engage with their sources.

What This Accomplishes:

Reduces resistance – Since it’s an even trade, it doesn’t feel like an attack.
Creates exposure – Even small interactions with different sources can plant seeds of doubt in rigid beliefs.
Encourages critical thinking – Over time, they may start recognizing patterns in how different outlets report the same stories.

Important Reminder:

All media has some bias, but not all bias is equal. A biased source can still be fact-based (e.g., NPR, BBC), while others distort facts to fit an agenda (e.g., OAN). It’s important to acknowledge that bias exists on both sides. Still, also to emphasize the degree and nature of that bias—some outlets strive for accountability, while others operate as propaganda machines.

Once this step is in place, we can move on to the next phase: discussing leadership qualities instead of just debating headlines. Let me know when you’re ready for that!

Idea 2: Weekly Check-Ins on a Key Issue

Rather than reacting to daily headlines, focus on one key issue over time—such as inflation, crime, or immigration. You and your friend or family member commit to following that issue from multiple sources and checking in weekly to discuss it.

Goal: Identify whether coverage shifts and whether right-wing media is subtly moving the goalposts. For example, if inflation drops but conservative media continues to portray the economy as failing, discuss why that might happen.
How to Frame It: “Let’s follow [issue] for the next month, checking multiple sources. We’ll see how different outlets cover it and compare notes.”
What This Accomplishes: It encourages critical thinking, reduces reliance on emotional, short-term narratives, and exposes media manipulation tactics in real time.

Idea 3: Leadership and Values Conversations

Instead of debating policies or media narratives, shift the focus to leadership qualities and what both of you want for the country. This moves the discussion from specific politicians (who trigger defensive reactions) to shared values.

Goal: Find common ground and highlight contradictions in their preferred candidates’ actions vs. their own values.
How to Frame It: “What do you think makes a great leader? What values should they have? Should they be honest? Should they respect the law?” Then, gently compare those expectations to the politicians they support.
What This Accomplishes: Helps them evaluate politicians more objectively rather than blindly defending their "team."

Idea 4: Misinformation Watchlist

Create a shared document or group chat where both of you can flag and fact-check viral claims.

Goal: Build a habit of questioning sources together, instead of just telling them they’re wrong.
How to Frame It: “There’s so much misinformation out there—let’s make a little challenge. If we see a claim that seems outrageous (on either side), let’s both fact-check it before sharing it.”
What This Accomplishes: Encourages skepticism and helps them experience fact-checking as an interactive process rather than an attack.