In this age of instant communication and televised international event coverage, I have a suggestion which would include highly informative and electrifying television/web coverage which could help to ameliorate some of the strife in various world trouble spots. Possibly sponsored by the UN, or other groups which are interested in promoting dialog, in centers of troubled areas town-hall-type meetings (such as have been made popular by President Clinton) could be organized to allow regular, every-day people who represent the various sides in their controversies to speak and dialog on live, international television. Strict security would make sure that no weapons would be allowed in the venue, but there would be no holds barred on what these people could say so that all issues could be expressed as well as any suggestions for working out these issues. In coordination with these meetings, a web-page could be dedicated to the project with transcripts of the meetings and a forum for anyone to respond with their comments and suggestions, possibly including a live chat room. Alongside these town meetings, videoconferences could be arranged to air live on international television for leaders of the various groups in the controveries. The transcripts of these videoconferences and opportunities for comment/suggestions could also be provided on the web-page. But this kind of access to public debate need not be limited to "world" political hot spots.

In every area of society, from high school students to road-raging drivers, to ethnic groups fighting over their homelands or neighborhoods, in little and in big, people are responding to controversy with violence. Innocent bystanders as well as key players are losing their lives, never to return to family and loved ones, simply because when frustrated over not having concerns heard and addressed people turn to deadly force. Of course, then they become mega-celebrities, their names splashed throughout the media, their causes debated endlessly. But the dead do not arise. Isn't it to all of our advantage to reverse this trend -- to have the public airing of concerns, the debates over possible solutions, the attention paid before frustration escalates into war?

Journalists could trade in their "if it bleeds it leads" tabloid mentality for one of looking for the dark areas that could benefit from the shine of their spotlight, more fitting to purveyors of truth. Shock talk tv could be replaced with actual dialog about current controversies, not by pundits or celebrities, but by the real people involved. We would all benefit from an assumption that real, everyday people can make a difference, can express thoughts and concerns about the issues that affect us in very public forums. In a new age of ever expanding communication opportunities, isn't it time to really listen to each other, to give dialog a chance?