Johanna Dunaway, research director at the University’s Institute for Democracy, Journalism and Citizenship and professor of political science at the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, says her interpretations of the research on this issue “is that media effects exist, but they don’t work the way people often assume—with media doing all the persuading. Media in all forms respond to audience preferences and behaviors as much as the other way around. Unfortunately, the patterns of information we end up being exposed to still exacerbate divisions.”
She says the blame is tied to the economic model of today’s media landscape. “Underlying media emphasis on the extreme and outrageous is that most digital media relies on attention metrics like clicks and because competition for the public’s attention is so intense. Media outlets face strong economic incentives to publish and promote the most attention-grabbing content,” she says.
Turning our attention back to the 2022 Pew Research study, it is clear that there has been a rise in the shares in both parties who describe their co-partisans in positive terms – saying they are more moral, open-minded and honest than other Americans.
Yet the opposite of that is also true, on several traits, majorities of both Republicans and Democrats attribute negative stereotypes to members of the opposing party: An overwhelming majority of Democrats (83%) say Republicans are a lot or somewhat more closed-minded than other Americans, while nearly seven-in-ten Republicans (69%) say the same about Democrats.
Nearly three-quarters of Republicans say Democrats are more immoral (72%) than other Americans, while an identical share (72%) say Democrats are more dishonest. Smaller majorities of Democrats characterize Republicans as more immoral (63%) or more dishonest (64%).
About half of Republicans (51%) and Democrats (52%) say that members of the other party are more unintelligent compared with other Americans.
There has been a particularly pronounced increase in the shares of partisans describing members of the other party as immoral over the past six years. In 2016, 47% of Republicans and 35% of Democrats said members of the other party were more immoral than other Americans; that increased to 55% and 47%, respectively, in 2019. Today, majorities in both parties (72% of Republicans, 63% of Democrats) view members of the opposing party as more immoral. The shares describing members of the other party as more dishonest have grown by a similar degree over the last six years.
Wow.
I don't know about you but one of the thoughts that kept circling in my brain was, "I wonder if that was the case in 2022, can you imagine what those percentages are in 2026?"
I also remember reading an article, (sorry, I can't remember the source) but it basically makes the case that how we view those we don't agree with has a great deal to do with the motivations that we are ascribing to their attitudes. A great example of this in the Bible is when Jesus healed the man with the withered hand.
In Mark, chapter 3, we see Jesus, as was his habit, entering the synagogue, and a man was there with a withered hand. And they, (the church leaders and worship participants), were watching Jesus, to see whether he would heal him on the Sabbath, so that they might accuse him. (Notice their concern was not for the man who needed healing, but whether or not Jesus was going to defy their Sabbath laws) And he said to the man with the withered hand, “Come here.” And he said to them, “Is it lawful on the Sabbath to do good or to do harm, to save life or to kill?” But they were silent. And, (don't miss this part of the story), he looked around at them with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart, and said to the man, “Stretch out your hand.” He stretched it out, and his hand was restored. The Pharisees went out and immediately held counsel with the Herodians against him, how to destroy him.
The church leaders, and those who were silent in this situation, were angry that Jesus was breaking the traditions that they had so heavily invested their life and philosophy. They attributed a motivation to Jesus that was not true. He was not solely trying to obliterate their laws and traditions, His primary motivation was the needs of the man who needed healing.
Jesus was also very angry, because the people that He had created, were so apathetic about the needs of those around them versus the effort it took to maintain the control they so passionately desired. Out of the two groups, only one was accurately assessing the other sides motivations. And that is a big deal when dealing with people who don't agree with our beliefs.
When we encounter those who disagree with issues we are passionate about, we have to remember first that we are not God, we can not accurately evaluate their hearts and motives. The best we can do is to listen, ask gentle questions, defusing the situation with our priority being to love them as Jesus loves them. Only then can we hope to change hearts for the Kingdom of God.
This blog borrows a significant amount of content from the following two websites / articles:
https://news.syr.edu/2025/10/23/the-great-divide-understanding-us-political-polarization/
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2022/08/09/republicans-and-democrats-increasingly-critical-of-people-in-the-opposing-party/
