As I look ahead to 2025, our country’s divisions make me want to stop writing opinion columns.
In the past decade, the chasms that divide our country have grown from mere cracks to gaping fault lines, splitting communities, families, and even the media. As someone who has been writing for years about contemporary and personal issues, I’m increasingly finding myself at a crossroads, questioning the value and impact of my writing.
The relentless division we witness today is not just exhausting — it’s disheartening to the point that stepping away from writing columns for The Daily Camera and The Denver Post feels more appealing than ever.
At the heart of my dilemma is the fundamental purpose of writing: to inform, to provoke thought, and to foster understanding. But in our current political climate, this purpose often feels increasingly futile. The audiences I reach seem more entrenched in their beliefs than ever before, impervious to perspectives that challenge their worldview. This polarization is not just political; it runs through cultural, economic, and even scientific discourse, creating an environment where meaningful dialogue is silenced.
Today’s media landscape has evolved into echo chambers where readers select content that reinforces their pre-existing beliefs. Algorithms and social media have amplified this effect, creating vacuums that insulate individuals from opposing viewpoints. In such a context, writing on complex issues often feels like shouting into the void, with little hope of sparking genuine engagement or change.
The reaction to my columns often underscores this divide. Responses are frequently less about the content and more about the perceived alignment with a particular side of the ideological spectrum. Constructive criticism has given way to vitriolic attacks from those who disagree.
Moreover, the pressure to remain relevant in an ever-changing media environment exacerbates the problem. The demand for sensationalism and immediacy can overshadow the need for thoughtful analysis. Columns that delve into the gray areas of issues are often bypassed in favor of those that deliver punchy, partisan headlines. This creates a paradox: the more I strive for balance and depth, the less likely my work is to be seen and engaged with.
The division we face is not limited to the media or political spheres; it permeates our daily interactions and relationships. Conversations with friends and family members have become minefields, where differing opinions can lead to fractures that seem irreparable. This societal shift is mirrored in the readership of my columns, where the expectation to take a definitive stand can overshadow the pursuit of truth and understanding.
So why not quit writing altogether? It’s a question I contemplate regularly. Maybe the answer lies in the moments of connection that still occasionally break through the noise. There are times when a reader reaches out, not to agree or disagree, but to engage in a genuine dialogue. These interactions, though rare, remind me of the potential power of words to transcend division and foster empathy.
Stepping away may make me feel like I am conceding defeat to the forces that seek to divide us. The polarization that plagues our society thrives on silence and withdrawal. By continuing to write, I hope to offset some of the narrative that we are hopelessly divided, even if it’s just for a few who are willing to listen.
Yet, the path forward is far from clear. As an opinion columnist, I must adapt to the new reality where the traditional platforms for dialogue have shifted. This might mean seeking new ways to engage with audiences, leveraging technology to reach those outside our usual circles, or collaborating with others to amplify diverse voices. It also requires a steadfast commitment to truth and integrity, even when faced with the temptation to cater to the extremes.
Ultimately, the decision to continue writing is deeply personal, driven by my belief in the potential for change, however incremental. While the divisions in our country are daunting, they are not insurmountable.
As long as there are readers who are open to dialogue and understanding, there remains a reason to write. And perhaps, in the act of writing, I can help mend, ever so small the fractures that threaten to tear us apart.
Paolo Coelho once said, “Writing is a socially acceptable form of getting naked in public.”
As a columnist who spends many hours creating free content, maybe it is time to stop, put on my clothes, and decide how best to spend my time in 2025. But my hope is I can continue to find the passion and discipline to better engage with you the reader, in a dialogue, not a monologue.
Jim Martin can be reached at jimmartinesq@gmail.com.
Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.