Your column points out the need for non-partisan, non-advocacy matchmakers who sit between the worlds of research and journalism and research and policy. They are different languages with different tools (ie your don’t know how explanation) and it helps to have interpreters in the room. And your point about being in the same room is in fact key. There are precious few opportunities for it, I would maintain in part because donors, public and private, are so focused on measurable ends that there is too little value put on process ie dialogue as an end itself. If done well, it can lead to greater understanding, better networks, and constructive opportunities for improving respective professions through engagement with the “other.” In this way, the promotion of dialogue is a “faith-based” effort – one must have faith that getting the right people in the room and facilitating open debate will produce positive if unpredictable improvements in research, reporting, and policy.

Thanks.
Guadalupe Zamarrón Garza

Thank you