Poynter's article is truly a knee-slapper:
Can people be civil about polarizing topics? 'Dialogue journalism' could serve as a roadmap
Journalists have become openly partisan; so how will they be able to be mediators or provide "dialogue"?
And the arrogant assumption that people need journalists to make them civilized is absurd. If any one group of professional people do not understand the concept of civility, it is journalists. Their scrums chase after people as they swarm them. They openly muse about the mental state of people they do not like, without any regard of the long-term consequences. They have condemned innocent people; sparked wars, spread rumours, gossiped, lied, and have committed every social faux pas under the sun.
And they are supposed to know how to shepherd a clueless flock with their brilliance and civility?
Not a chance.
It is journalists who need the etiquette lessons. The public have every right to argue and debate. It's called negotiation, hammering out, debating, and progressing. Journalists want people to walk lockstep and be predictable. A healthy democracy has raucous debates until a solution is reached.
And people know their own situations. Give them facts. They will know how to make the most of them.
And stop trying to play social engineers. Your track record with your own profession has been disgraceful.