Social distancing requires us to stop many of the things that we usually do. This could be an opportunity to invite your kids to practice critical thinking skills and engage with news and history thoughtfully.
Different media outlets, and different social media contributors, offer contradictory takes on the coronavirus—how it originated, how dangerous it is, and what measures should be taken to deal with it. People have different opinions and also assert different facts. Parents and older children might take time to think together about how to evaluate these different claims. That might include:
Understanding the difference between provable present/past facts, future factual predictions based on extrapolating from current facts, and opinions.
Considering how we verify factual information. How can we get fact checks? Who fact-checks the fact-checkers? How do we decide which sources to trust? Different families and individuals will answer this differently. I am more apt to believe writers/speakers who have relevant expertise/experience, don’t contradict themselves, do admit when they’ve been wrong and correct themselves, and use thoughtful, matter-of-fact language instead of invective. I’m more apt to trust media sources that admit and correct their own errors, use thoughtful and matter-of-fact language in reporting news, and cover stories which don’t all cohere around a single obvious political agenda. What do you trust?
Looking for the core principles underlying people’s opinions. Even when there’s agreement on fact, people have different priorities that shape their views on how we should respond to the facts. This shows up in the current debate pitting public health against economic stability. What are your own core beliefs that shape your views? What is the most positive way in which you could understand the core beliefs of people who disagree with you? It’s easy and tempting for all of us to describe our opponents’ core beliefs in scathingly negative terms. If your family knows and respects someone—a friend, a relative—with very different views, think of them when you’re trying to account for other people’s views.
If you think someone you love who holds very different views is up for a conversation, ask them if they’re willing to talk with you/your kids about what they believe and why they believe it. Try to ask questions and to understand, not to score debate points. That doesn’t mean, of course, that you need to agree or pretend to agree with them; but most people respond well to being asked polite and thoughtful questions, and to being listened to; and most important issues are complicated enough so that it’s helpful to have nuanced discussions instead of yelling. If you find that people’s feelings are getting hurt, you can back off, thank the other person for being willing to engage, and say this doesn’t seem to be a good time.
Americans have a long history of arguing over facts and opinions. Some primary-source collections offer an intriguing look into how different citizens, and different news outlets, understood earlier controversies. When I was a kid I enjoyed reading examples of divergent views and vehement debates in our Annals of America collection of primary sources. Reading those, and thinking about the very different and strongly held political views of my relatives and friends, helped me to learn critical thinking and also to understand history as personal, lively, interesting, and intimately connected to current events.
Various primary source collections are available online. There’s a fairly comprehensive list of free online collections here. Free learning modules offering background information and primary sources offering opposing views of different historical controversies are online at https://www.dhr.history.vt.edu/modules/us/index.html (primary sources are in the Evidence sections of each module).