There are so many ways to solve a problem. And Seattle seems to have a lot of problems these days! Here's a big one: most of our elected officials are center-right politicians. They lead a city with a lot of center-left to really-left residents. Their decisions can be, let's say, wrong. Oppressive. Discriminatory. Harmful. But one of the things I love about Seattle is how vocal we are.

When police were raiding gay bars under the state’s draconian liquor laws, we spoke up until they changed it. Last year, the mayor and parks department tried to close one of Seattle's only queer nude beaches. Protestors clogged public forums for months (and are still fighting!) until they heard us and backed down. Our currently-elected officials don't always take public opposition to heart. Last fall hundreds of people argued against laws we all knew were discriminatory. That fight was not yet successful. And as predicted, the laws haven't made anyone safer.

Gun violence is a serious issue in Seattle. People across the city are sharing their concerns about safety. Gun violence usually rises as temperatures do. It makes perfect sense that local officials would convene community forums. They'd want to hear from their constituents and neighbors, right?

a few rotten forums

Councilmember Rob Saka's district represents West Seattle. A recent forum he hosted drew more than 100 people who wanted to speak to people in power. But the only people speaking were the ones he invited–the ones sitting at the long table at the front of the room. I counted 8 speakers who kicked off the night with their own speeches. It was Saka's chief of staff, then Saka, then the city council president, then the police chief. Soon the audience heard from the heads of the parks department and the public utility. These folks spoke for so long that the forum left only 10 minutes to answer pre-written questions. One attendee commented,

"This was supposed to be a conversation about gun violence in our community something that’s affecting real people’s lives every single day. [...] We were talked at by a panel as if we were just an audience to manage, not people whose lives are on the line. That’s not leadership. That’s not accountability. And it’s definitely not community engagement. It was a disgrace.”

Saka received a mountain of critique for his forum. But he's not alone in crowd management. The Seattle PD hosted a community meeting in the Capitol Hill neighborhood. The police present were letting people speak and ask questions. But their responses kept leading the group back to the only solution of the night: more police! The department lamented that there weren't enough cops on the street. Hannah Saunders summarized the meeting like this: “The response from several SPD officers? Call 911 and wait until staffing levels rise[...]” We might expect this from a forum hosted by the police, but it's still disappointing. Lots of people feel unsafe around the police. Perhaps we need solutions besides the very expensive one that could kill me.

"why are these people yelling at me?"

What are the event organizers getting wrong? It's possible that these officials are afraid of the kind of unruly public outcries I described earlier. To paraphrase the commenter who wrote about Saka's event, they may want the appearance of a public forum without the public part. Whatever the reason, here's why these types of events aren't successful.

Officials already have a voice. Elected officials already have ways to get their messages out. If we want to hear from them, we can go to their press releases, interviews, media appearances, and more. The public can't say the same. When we demand face time with an elected, it's not to give them another way to air their opinions. It's so we can air ours.

Unwise use of expertise. Imagine having a chance to interview the foremost expert in their field. I'm blanking on a famous person who isn't problematic, so let's keep the name vague, it's not important. We go through the trouble of setting up an interview, finding a space, writing questions. And for 45 exquisite minutes, we tell them all about our cats. Then it's time for them to leave. Every community member is an expert in their own life. They have lived experience about their neighborhood and what's important to them. And there were more than 100 people in that room! I'd set off fireworks myself if it meant getting that many people together to complain about me. Instead, they wasted their time and I wasted mine.

Not listening to not understand. There's an unequal power dynamic between an elected official and a constituent. This dynamic may imply that the official's opinion is worth more than the person who voted for them. Think back to the Seattle PD community meeting I described. Residents came to talk about what was happening in their neighborhood. The only way the police could imagine solving their problems was with more police. "Call 911" was their main recommendation. The person with authority filters what they hear through their own lens. They consider their own preconceived notions of how to solve problems and what they are able to do. That becomes all that they can do, even if it doesn't solve the problem. Public officials must often have a big-picture view of complex issues. That view is still susceptible to the groupthink and pragmatism that shuts down real dialogue.

spaces for real dialogue

What if a community forum could focus on the community? What could that space look like if we built it for dialogue rather than information sharing? Here's how I'd design it.

1. Don't speak more than you have to. Start by thanking people for their time. Acknowledge what it must have taken to be there. Then set the tone. Why are we here? What do people want to get out of this time together?
2. Begin the sharing. Even in a large group, there are many ways to learn what people have to say. Ask questions that help you understand why an issue is important to them. Don't make assumptions about the solutions they're asking for. Sometimes the only solution people can offer is, "do something!" They might really be saying, "do something else!"
3. Rapid analysis. Ask participants for help summarizing what everyone shared. Group these into themes or topic categories. This can help you count the issues people spoke about the most, and which may be more personal topics.
4. Rapid solutions. If the space allows, have people divide into relevant topic areas. I like grouping people into smaller groups because we can cover more topics that way. It also allows quieter folks to speak up. But some folks hate when I put them into smaller groups. A large group can energize speakers or it can shut down real dialogue. It depends on the group. If the forum has coalesced around one or two major topics, it's okay to keep people together. Include your institutional experts in the groups where they're needed. These experts must take part in solutions generating. But their opinions can't be the only solution. It won't help if the experts spend the whole time shutting down solutions they don't like.
5. Next steps. Thank people for their time, and for contributing to the wisdom of the group. Now, what should happen after we leave? How would people like to stay involved? Do they know where to go if they need something else? A sign-up sheet, link to resources, or plans for follow-up can go a long way. Dialogue cannot stop when people walk out the door.

forums for the people

It can be so isolating when it feels like nobody is hearing us. If dialogue is how large groups stay connected, a lack of dialogue can further divide us. We have so many ways to share information. What we need are more opportunities to understand each other.

In the race for mayor, Zohran Mamdani is polling second with Jewish New Yorkers—but one would hardly know it reading the paper of record.

I need your help. I’m trying to find a phrase to describe an important phenomenon and maybe help people recognize it more easily. The phenomenon is this: When we fix a problem, we forget it. I don’t mean you and me in “we” — we, of course, remember. But pop culture forgets, and the mass media forgets, and young people never learn about the problem or how it was solved. 

Maybe this will make more sense with examples. Have you ever seen a bald eagle? They almost went extinct! And now they’re everywhere, stealing fish from ospreys (which also almost went extinct) and getting in fights with peregrine falcons (which also almost went extinct). The pesticide DDT caused birds that eat fish that eat bugs to have thin eggshells, and the birds’ nests failed. It took a lot of science and journalism and public outrage, but we banned DDT and the eagles are back.

Do you remember (or have you heard about) the ozone hole? Chlorofluorocarbons were thinning the part of the atmosphere that keeps us from getting sizzled by ultraviolet light. It took a lot of science and journalism and public outrage and global cooperation, but we banned chlorofluorocarbons and the ozone hole is healing. 

We fixed acid rain. We took the lead out of gasoline. We prevented catastrophic computer failures from the Y2K bug. These problems dominated news and pop culture for years, but now they’re gone, and we’re left with problems that seem unsolvable. But we can solve problems! We have, and we will. 

Naming something can make it easier to recognize, like the Bechdel Test for movies or the Finkbeiner Test for writing about scientists. Shifting Baselines names the phenomenon that people get used to the environment we’re in and don’t realize it was once better. What I’m trying to capture is kind of the opposite of that, but not just for the environment.

When I worked at Scientific American, I held a brainstorming session on Slack to talk about what to call the phenomenon. (Brainstorming sessions should always be no-shame zones, all puns allowed, so some of these are goofy, but that stimulates the little gray cells.) Here are some of the ideas: Vanishing Victories. Stealthy Healthies. Bygone Betterments (I told you it got goofy). Achievement Amnesia. Unsung Solutions. Forgotten Wins. Problems Solved. Fixed and Forgotten.

What do you think? Do any of these names appeal to you? Would you like to suggest others? Please reply in the comments or on Bluesky, and thanks.

Image courtesy of Flickr user Kenneth Cole Schneider.

At the 2025 Cascade PBS Ideas Festival, four prominent Seattle media-makers discussed — and dissected — the stories people tell about the Emerald City. 

Over a series of interviews with Northwest Reports podcast hosts Sara Bernard and Maleeha Syed, the four changemakers pushed back on narratives about diversity, change, accessibility and liberal politics in Seattle. The speakers were Cynthia Brothers, founder of Vanishing Seattle; Lex Vaughn, founder of The Needling; Kiesha B. Free, founder of Hey, Black Seattle!; and Mindie Lind, a local writer, musician and director. 

Is Old Seattle dead?

The first live taping of the day featured Brothers, whose media project, Vanishing Seattle, documents and celebrates the legacy of disappearing local businesses. Brothers started the project in 2016 after she moved back to Seattle from New York and noticed small local businesses seemed to be disappearing at an alarming rate. 

“When these places go away, you can really feel a need to grieve and to mourn,” Brothers told Northwest Reports. 

Brothers said giving people hope — and pushing back on narratives about the old Seattle dying — is also an important part of the project. 

“I want people to still feel like they have hope and they can effect the change that they want to see in the city,” Brothers said. 

Brothers said her favorite part of the project is documenting “unvanishings” — when a beloved community business slated to close manages to bounce back and survive. 

Brothers said she also wants to push back on the “old vs. new” Seattle narrative, noting that a lot of new establishments still carry the spirit of old Seattle. 

“I think there’s new things that are still very much something to be supported and celebrated,” Brothers said. “I definitely don’t think it’s over.”

Is Seattle progressive?

Vaughn is the founder of The Needling, a satirical Seattle news site launched in 2018. 

Vaughn, a former Seattle Times reporter, told Northwest Reports that Seattle lends itself well to satire. “Anything that takes itself a little too seriously is ripe for comedy,” she said. 

Vaughn said Seattle’s national reputation as a “super-liberal” city is also a reliable source of comedy. Elected leaders are quick to label themselves as Democrats, Vaughn said, but their actions don’t always align with their stated progressive values.   

“I think sometimes Seattle can get a little too comfortable [saying] ‘Democrat, no further questions,’” Vaughn said. “But it’s like, look at what laws they’re proposing, what they’re supporting.”

Needling headlines often touch on controversial issues that generate strong reactions. Vaughn said the headline that lost her account the most followers was a 2023 headline that read “Seattle Homeless Disguise Themselves as Trees in Effort to Get Protection from City.” 

“That really struck a chord, the hypocrisy of acting like you care about the environment but not your fellow human beings,” Vaughn said. “There’s a lot of people like that in Seattle talking about how progressive they are.”

Is Seattle diverse?

Free is a speaker, comedian and founder of Hey, Black Seattle!, an online resource to connect Black people in Seattle and grow the community. The project grew out of frustration she felt over the false impression that there “aren’t any Black people in Seattle.”  

“I exist,” Free told Northwest Reports. “I’m Black, I’m here.”

There are actually hundreds of thousands of Black people in the Seattle metro area, Free said, but the city can still feel isolating. From gentrification to city planning, “disconnection is baked into our society,” Free said.

Free founded Hey, Black Seattle! in 2021. She hopes the online directory and resource can act as almost “a little bit of a Black bat signal” to make it easier for people to find each other. 

Free echoed other speakers’ comments when asked about the idea that Seattle is a progressive place.

“A lot of people are cosplaying as progressive or radical or whatever it might be because they think it sounds cool,” Free said. “It’s sucking up revolutionary energy … when you take up that space, you present yourself as if you’re going to do that work, you siphon off strength from a movement.”

Is Seattle accessible? 

Lind is a local writer, musician and director who is also working on an animated film about being a person born without legs. 

Lind and the Northwest Reports hosts discussed Lind’s criticism of Seattle’s new Overlook Walk, which opened to the public last year and is dominated by stairs. There’s an elevator, but it’s located in the back of the structure, away from the waterfront views the park is supposed to highlight.

“I don’t have any choices, I’m ostracized, I’m not using the space as it was intended,” Lind said.  

Lind said the inaccessible design undercuts the narrative of Seattle as a progressive city. 

“These little things come up where you’re like, ‘I’m not sure if we can pat ourselves on the back quite yet,’” Lind said. 

As a musician, Lind also discussed accessibility challenges in the city’s music venues. It’s not the venues themselves that feel unwelcoming, she said, but the broader “economic structures and what we decided to value” that makes things feel unwelcoming.  

Artists can’t afford to live in Seattle, Lind said, and there remains a need for the arts community in Seattle to “industrialize.” She said the city will need to step up and take a more active role in making sure the community thrives.

“Until we start taking that pressure and those responsibilities off the individual and off the artist, then the culture is going to die,” she said. “We need to support it.”

You can listen to Northwest Reports’ full conversations with Lind, Free, Vaughn and Brothers starting June 25.

Topics:

LAS VEGAS — "We often talk about baseball games as a metric for where we are, and we're literally in the first inning," one of the Winklevoss twins gloats. "And this game's going to overtime."

It's the first day of Bitcoin 2025, industry day here at the largest cryptocurrency conference in the world. This Winklevoss is sharing the stage with the other one, plus Donald Trump's newly appointed crypto and AI czar David Sacks. They are in the midst of a victory lap, laughing with the free ease of men who know they have it made. The mangled baseball metaphor neither lands nor elicits laughs, but that's fine. He's earned, or at any rate acquired, the right to be wrong.

This year, Pride Month arrives at an especially dire moment for the LGBTQ+ community. Under the second Trump administration, homophobic vitriol and violence are on the rise. On Elon Musk’s X platform, a “deepfake” video of Donald Trump canceling Pride Month has gone viral. And even as Pride celebrations continue as planned (in many places without as many corporate contributions)…

Source