Polarization | Depolarization – Challenges for Politics, the Media, and Society

How polarized is Germany—and what can be done about it? These questions were the focus of the MIDEM conference, which took place on April 22 at Publix in Berlin. For one day, representatives from academia, politics, culture, and civil society discussed the causes, perceptions, and counterstrategies for social polarization.

“We are experiencing a fundamental structural shift in the political public sphere,” said MIDEM Director Hans Vorländer in his opening remarks. “Discourses are emotionally charged, and interventions in the media and online lead to spirals of outrage. This makes the issue of polarization more urgent than ever.”

Keynote Presentations: Understanding Polarization

Maik Herold and Oliviero Angeli presented the current state of research in two keynote presentations. Key findings: According to the MIDEM Polarization Barometer, more than 80 percent of respondents perceive German society as polarized—even though Germany ranks in the middle of the pack in international comparisons. Affective polarization—that is, emotional hostility between political camps—is on the rise in particular, and it erodes trust, the willingness to compromise, and democratic attitudes. Counterstrategies address the issue at various levels: psychological interventions, dialogue formats, media initiatives, and institutional reforms.

Roundtable I: Civic Dialogues Against Polarization

The first roundtable, featuring Luca Piwodda, Sebastian Reißig, Heike Radvan, and Sarah Wohlfeld, and moderated by Paulina Fröhlich, focused on practical implementation. Citizen dialogues have been experiencing a renaissance in recent years—but they are not a panacea. Crucial factors include careful planning, clear objectives, and professional moderation. One key challenge remains: dialogue formats primarily reach those who are already open to discussion. The “invisible third”—those who are disillusioned and the pragmatists—rarely participate. The discussion also addressed whether citizen dialogues are the right format for both forms of polarization—ideological and emotional—and how sustainability can be ensured beyond individual events.

Roundtable II: Media and Elites

In the second roundtable, Michael Brüggemann, Hanna Israel, Uwe Krüger, and Philipp Lorenz-Spreen, moderated by Maria Exner, discussed the role of the media and elites. Journalism can both reinforce and mitigate polarization. Local journalism plays an underestimated role in this regard: Where it breaks down, those who profit from polarization have an easier time. At the same time, it became clear that social media are not neutral platforms—their attention economy favors the escalation of conflicts. Formats that integrate personal and empathetic elements, on the other hand, can have a depolarizing effect.

Panel Discussion: What Does This Mean for the Future?

To conclude, Hans Vorländer, Laura-Kristine Krause, Ursula Münch, and Marion Ackermann —moderated by Ferdos Forudastan —discussed strategies for addressing polarization. The discussion highlighted how the dynamics of polarization vary depending on the field: In political education, schools and teachers are under growing pressure; in the cultural sector, for example, the boycott debates surrounding the Middle East conflict have intensified the already controversial negotiation between art and politics; and a loss of trust between the state and society is palpable, one that has not yet been adequately addressed.

The panelists agreed that depolarization cannot be an isolated project. State modernization and more direct contact between politics and society hold potential—as do cultural spaces where social disputes are productively resolved. Museums, for example, enjoy a high level of public trust and can serve as places of identification. At the same time, the nature of public discourse must change: academia and the media come across as exclusionary to large segments of society—a finding that remains uncomfortable even for the panelists’ own work.

The conference was funded by the Mercator Foundation. Publix provided the venue, and its director, Maria Exner, also played an active role as moderator.

→ The MIDEM Policy Paper “Reducing Affective Polarization—But How?” is available here: https://forum-midem.de/affektive-polarisierung-verringern-aber-wie/a