Split Narratives
by Trista Schoonmaker
What’s In The Media?
There’s been no shortage of conflict in the media lately—both in the U.S. and around the world. And while we won’t attempt to solve global issues in this newsletter, we can look at what they reveal about how conflict works in our everyday lives.
Take the media coverage of the recent LA immigration protests. The site AllSides.com analyzed how news outlets across the political spectrum reported on the same events—and the differences were striking. One article, “Split Narratives: Media Push Extreme Conclusions on LA Immigration Protests, Violence” laid out just how drastically coverage can diverge, depending on the outlet’s perspective.
This is no surprise, right? We all know this happens. But seeing it so clearly presented can still be jarring. The news you read about the events in LA probably reflected what you already believe or want to believe about the direction of the country and the specific players involved. It takes real effort to set aside your beliefs and deliberately look for the other point of view—the one your news coverage may not be presenting.
Why Is This Important?
What’s the lesson for interpersonal conflict?
The impulse is the same. In moments of conflict, our perspectives narrow. Just like biased reporting, we filter what we see through what we already believe.
Why does this happen? We’re perfectly reasonable people, and in normal circumstances, we pride ourselves on welcoming multiple perspectives. What’s going on here?
Conflict situations challenge us in a different way—they can threaten our values or even our sense of identity. When we feel that threat, the automatic impulse is to protect ourselves, to stand up for our values. We do that by getting very focused on what we believe, clarifying it and repeating it to ourselves and others. We settle into a state of certainty. And from that place, it becomes all too easy to discount all those multiple perspectives we used to embrace.
In my work, I’ve seen this countless times. A person in conflict can intellectually recognize that other perspectives exist. . .but emotionally? They resist. They don’t want to believe something that threatens their understanding of the situation—or of themselves.
So the conflict continues to spiral as both sides dig into their split narratives. Like the LA news coverage, each side tells a different version of the same story, even loses the will to recognize there might be another legitimate perspective. And connection becomes even more elusive.
How Can I Use This?
The only antidote to the perspective-narrowing that comes with conflict is to deliberately widen your view. Here are three way to do it:
• Ask “What am I missing here?” When you feel the tension rising, don’t just turn to people who see the world the same way you do—they’ll tell you what you already believe. Instead seek out views that challenge you and ask this question. Then listen with as much curiosity as you can muster.
• Say “I didn’t think about it that way.” When someone offers a different take, resist the urge to argue. Don’t jump into an explanation that will only reinforce what you already want to believe. Simply acknowledge what you’re hearing. Let you mind sit with the idea that both things might be valid at the same time.
• Name the threat: If a viewpoint feels uncomfortable, try to step outside the emotion. Ask yourself: What value of mine feels under threat? How is my identity is being challenged? How can I protect myself while still allowing for the legitimacy of multiple perspectives? Often, just naming the fear helps reduce its power—and opens the door to more productive dialogue.
There’s not much we can do to fix divisive media narratives. But in our own conversations, in the places where we have influence, we can interrupt the spiral of certainty and create space for multiple perspectives. That starts with awareness. It grows with practice. And it’s how we reduce the tension and move from conflict to connection.
Questions Leaders Ask
In this week's Conflict EQ Lens, we explore how conflict can narrow our perspective and reinforce what we already believe. Whether in the media, the workplace, or our personal relationships, conflict often creates competing narratives that make understanding and connection more difficult. Here are answers to some of the most common questions leaders ask about perspective, certainty, and conflict.
Why do people see the same situation so differently?
People interpret events through the lens of their experiences, values, beliefs, and assumptions. Two people can observe the same event and arrive at very different conclusions because they focus on different details and assign different meanings to what they see. These differences do not automatically mean one person is right and the other is wrong—they often reflect different perspectives on the same reality.
What is confirmation bias?
Confirmation bias is our tendency to notice, remember, and seek out information that supports what we already believe while discounting information that challenges our views. This bias affects everyone and can become particularly strong during conflict, when emotions and personal values are involved.
Why does conflict make it harder to see other perspectives?
Conflict can trigger feelings of threat, uncertainty, or vulnerability. When this happens, people often become more focused on defending their position and protecting their identity. As a result, curiosity decreases and certainty increases. The more threatened we feel, the more difficult it can become to genuinely consider another person's perspective.
What is perspective-taking?
Perspective-taking is the ability to intentionally consider how a situation may look from another person's point of view. It does not require agreement, nor does it mean abandoning your own beliefs. Perspective-taking helps people understand the experiences, concerns, and motivations that may be shaping another person's actions or opinions.
How can leaders avoid becoming trapped in their own narrative?
Leaders can widen their perspective by asking questions, seeking diverse viewpoints, and remaining open to information that challenges their assumptions. Questions such as "What might I be missing?" and "How might someone else see this situation?" can help interrupt automatic thinking and create space for better decisions.
Why do conflicts become more polarized over time?
When people repeatedly interact only with those who share their views, their beliefs often become more entrenched. As certainty grows, openness to alternative perspectives decreases. Over time, each side may develop a narrative that reinforces its own position while dismissing the legitimacy of the other. This cycle can make productive dialogue increasingly difficult.
How can I stay curious when I strongly disagree with someone?
Curiosity begins by separating understanding from agreement. You do not have to change your beliefs to understand another person's perspective. Asking thoughtful questions, listening carefully, and exploring what values or concerns may be driving the other person's position can help maintain curiosity even during disagreement.
What is Conflict EQ?
Conflict EQ is the ability to remain grounded, curious, and constructive when tension, disagreement, or difficult conversations arise. A key part of Conflict EQ is the ability to widen your perspective, challenge your assumptions, and remain open to understanding others even when their views differ from your own.