The COVID-19 Pandemic and Rising Incivility

25 min readSep 12, 2021

Incivility has always been present in American society since its inception, particularly in politics. Now the pandemic seems to have been a stimulus for an upswing.

On a daily basis we see politicians vitriolic verbal attacks, extreme “fake news” and rhetoric on cable news shows, not to mention the hate speech being spewed on social media platforms and perhaps the ultimate in incivility, the January 6 insurrection in the U.S. capitol.

We have seen in the news incidents where “anti-maskers” and “anti-vaxxers” have physically intimated and attacked health care workers, teachers and local politicians for instituting public health measures for the spread of COVID. We’ve also witnessed politicians and their families receiving death threats and actual physical assault.

All of those events and trends point to the characteristics of an uncivil society, and people should be worried. It can lead to the unravelling of democracy.

I had the opportunity to be keynote speaker on a special President’s Forum on Incivility as a positive initiative at the University of Maryland, because the University was concerned about issues of incivility and bullying on campus. Portions of my speech appear here in this article.

Civility and Incivility Defined

Civility has been defined as “formal politeness and courtesy in behavior or speech.” Synonyms are courtesy, good manners, consideration, respect, graciousness. It is a Latin word that originated in 509 BCE when Romans founded their republic, and kings were driven from the city. Civility originated from the Latin word civis, which means citizen. The word mutated into civitas, meaning the rights and duties of citizenship. Later the word civilitas appeared, meaning the art and science of citizenship. Under those definitions in the Roman Empire, the rights of citizenship meant that citizens met in an assembly where they voted for their leaders. It also meant the right to be governed under laws that they voted for and not subject to the whims of despots. That is until the Roman Emperors appeared.

Historians who have studied the Roman Empire have debated the reasons why the great Empire eventually declined and fell. Some of those experts argue the loss of the civil society as a major reason for the fall of the Romans. Roman people, particularly the rulers and their followers, stopped treating each other with respect. The Empire stopped treating the people they conquered with respect. What was once a society of mutual respect for all became a society of unequal treatment of people. There was an irony here. The Romans created an empire that expanded around the world had put great emphasis on civil virtue. The Romans believed in honest debate, civility in the streets and treating adversaries with respect, even if defeating them in battle. As the Roman Empire aged, those beliefs and behaviors waned and finally disappeared.

The English word civility originated from the French word civilité. Some historians believe it was Eleanor of Aquitaine, Henry II’s wife and mother of Richard the Lion Heart and King John, who brought civility England. But the Roman Republic and its emphasis on civic duty had disappeared and in Europe it was replaced by a classed system of lords and vassals. Civility became the proper conduct between lords and free men (not indentured servants or slaves) who served them– deference, cooperation, service, reciprocal rights and duties, and proper speech and dress. Civility became a social, political, and courtly word. For example, besides being a document that contributed to the concept of a democratic society, the Magna Carta was an agreement between the king and his vassals.

The Renaissance was also the Age of Science, and the Enlightenment and a redefinition of civility. The Renaissance was an age of humanism where society focused on broad human and humanistic concerns. Some of the Roman virtues of civility were reborn and flourished in the Italian city-states and republics. The communes throughout Europe had special civic and economical privileges during the Renaissance. The educated gentleman was characterized as:

Having polished manners, courtly etiquette, fine speech,
Having a nobility of bearing and attitude,
Having a love of beauty, sensitive, and respectful to their class and to others,
Being sophisticated and international (European), educated in the humanities,
Being inspired by honor and duty, was deliberate and liberal in thought; and a gentleman.

The late eighteenth century experienced the American Revolution and the French Revolution, the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen. All of these were part of a wider movement that demanded rights for everyone grounded in the rights of citizenship.

Presidential democracies such as the United States and parliamentary democracies in Europe and Canada appeared in the nineteenth century and the franchise for women was won in the twentieth. The greatest achievement of the twentieth century was the UN’s adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The idea of civility was expended with these provisions:

All the human family are citizens of the Earth.
Civility is the art of citizenship; it is the recognition of the reciprocal rights and duties of those who govern and are governed.
It is the proper understanding of the human condition, of human relationships, and the power of human heartedness.
It recognizes the qualities of humanness that bond us together in the human household and the human family.
It recognizes the universal human rights of others.
It is formed in the proper study of the humanities– those studies that explore and honor the human struggle and the human condition.

Jim Taylor, a psychologist at the University of San Francisco, writes in the Huffington Post that “Civility is about something far more important than how people comport themselves with others. Rather, civility is an expression of a fundamental understanding and respect for the laws, rules, and norms (written and implicit) that guide its citizens in understanding what is acceptable and unacceptable behavior. For a society to function, people must be willing to accept those strictures. Though still in the distance, the loss of civility is a step toward anarchy, where anything goes; you can say or do anything, regardless of the consequences.”

Incivility Defined

The word “incivility” is derived from the Latin incivilis, meaning “not of a citizen.” Incivility is a general term for disrespectful social behavior ranging from rudeness or lack of respect for others, to vandalism and threatening behavior. In the workplace, incivility can show up as bullying, harassment and deliberate isolation.

Research Evidence for Increasing Incivility

A Google Scholar search of the term workplace incivility returned 23 articles and books published from the years 1996 through 2000. In contrast from 2011 to 2015, there were 1,700 articles and books published on this topic.

Here is some other data to illustrate the increasing incidents of incivility:

1. Civil discourse is “the free and respectful exchange of different ideas”. According to a Pew Poll, Eight out of 10 Americans believe that the lack of civil discourse in the political system is a serious problem.

2. Eighty-two percent of American respondents to a 2017 Pew survey felt that political advertisements were too “nasty” and 72 percent believed that political commercials that attacked the opponent were “inappropriate”.

3. Research has linked political incivility to reduced trust in the legitimacy of political candidates, political polarization, and policy gridlock.

Incivility in America continues to erode and rude behavior is becoming our “new normal,” according to the annual study on Civility in America: A Nationwide Survey, conducted by global public relations firm Weber Shandwick and public affairs firm Powell Tate in partnership with KRC Research. The study found that 70 percent of Americans believe incivility has reached crisis proportions. With Americans encountering incivility more than twice a day on average (2.4 times per day), and 43 percent expecting to experience incivility in the next 24 hours, dealing with incivility has become a way of life for many people.

Here are some additional findings from Civility in America: A Nationwide Survey:

According to the same poll, 81 percent of Americans think that incivility is leading to an increase in violence. Politicians, America’s youth, the media and the Internet are assigned most responsibility for the problem. Most notably, for the first time since the survey began in 2010, the Internet/social media has risen into the top ranks of perceived causes of incivility. Of those who expect civility to worsen in the next few years, 34 percent blame Twitter — a significant rise from 2012.
Weber Shandwick reported nearly 50% of those surveyed said they were withdrawing from the basic tenants of democracy — government and politics — because of incivility and bullying.
Half of American parents (50%) report that their children have experienced incivility at school and nearly half of Americans twenty years and older (45%) say that they’d be afraid to be teenagers today because of incivility’s frequent occurrence.
Approximately seven in 10 Americans (69%) have either stopped buying from a company or have re-evaluated their opinions of a company because someone from that company was uncivil in their interaction. Further, nearly six in 10 (58%) have advised friends, family or co-workers not to buy certain products because of uncivil, rude or disrespectful behavior from the company or its representatives.
Nearly seven in 10 Americans — 69% — report that cyber-bullying is getting worse. An equally large number (72%) worry about children being cyber-bullied.

The Causes of Incivility

There are a number of interrelated social, economic and psychological causes for incivility. Here are a few:

The example set by political and business leaders. When leaders exhibit uncivil behavior, it gives license for others to do the same.
Many Americans are stressed these days, given the economic situation and uncertainties about the future.They’re concerned about their jobs and families; they’re working longer and harder than ever or not at all, and they are not sure when things will get better.
Economic inequality. Inequality is increasing in the U.S. to unheard of levels, where the 1% are accruing most of the benefits of the booming economy, at the expense of the poor and middle classes.
Anger, fear and blaming. Frustration with the COVID pandemic, and economic conditions for many white working class people has created anger and resentment, focused both on internal targets and other countries, or immigrants.
Twisted views of freedom and individualism. The cult of individualism and lack of restraint:“I’ll do it my way,” or “you can’t infringe on my freedom to do whatever I want.”
The disintegration of the belief and commitment to community and increasing isolation. The cult of individualism, more prominent in the U.S. than anywhere else, has reinforced the belief that an individual’s misfortune is their fault, and that society doesn’t have an obligation to ensure basic social welfare for all its citizens. Add to that the increasing phenomena of loneliness in the US and you have a double whammy.

Incivility in the Workplace

According to a survey by Zogby International, almost 50% of the U.S. workers have reported experiencing some kind of bullying — verbal abuse insults, threats, screaming, sarcasm or ostracism. One study by John Medina showed that workers stressed by bullying performed 50% worse on cognitive tests. Other studies estimate the financial costs of bullying in the workplace at more than $200 billion per year. The consequences of such bullying have spread to families and other institutions and cost organizations reduced creativity, low morale and increased turnover.

According to the Workplace Bullying Institute, 40% of the workers who were bullied did not report it to their bosses or employers, and of those that did, 62% reported that no action was taken to address their complaints.

“Workplace incivility has doubled over the past two decades and has an average annual impact on companies of $14,000 per employee due to loss of production and work time,” according to a study by C.C. Rosen and colleagues published in the Journal of Applied Psychology. Uncivil behaviors at work — put-downs, sarcasm and other condescending comments — tend to have a contagious effect, like a virus, the researchers found.

In another study by Kristoffer Holm and colleagues, published in BioMed Research International, rudeness at work is contagious. Their studies show that being subjected to rudeness is a major reason for dissatisfaction at work and that unpleasant behaviour spreads if nothing is done about it.

Russell Johnson, an associate professor at Michigan State University, published a study in the Journal of Applied Psychology the subtlety of incivility, noting that it “does not involve openly hostile behavior, threats, or sabotage. As such, incivility is more benign and does not warrant the same legal attention or formal sanctions as other forms of mistreatment. Yet, it is a relatively frequent, low-intensity negative behavior that has a substantial impact on employees”.

Johnson believes our increasing dependence on e-mail contributes to the rise in incivility. “I think our communication is less direct,” he said. “A lot of our communication is done via text or e-mail. It’s hard to understand the intent of an e-mail without any additional language or social or facial cues to go along with it. That creates more ambiguity. And it makes it easier to be uncivil when you’re not face-to-face with someone.”

And one of the big problems is that incivility is sneaky, Johnson says. It’s not in-your-face, like harassment or bullying. Johnson’s study notes that “because incivility (a) reflects a mild form of mistreatment that is likely to go unpunished, (b) is not limited to interactions with those in authority positions, and it is easily denied and therefore excused; it occurs more frequently than other forms of mistreatment and, thus, has the potential to create a noxious social environment.”

This comes into particular focus with a new study in the Journal of Management. A research team led by Sandy Lim from the National University of Singapore finds that when people have hostile experiences at work, they’re more likely to be angry or withdrawn when they get home.

“Our findings show that the experience of incivility was positively related to feelings of hostility, which was in turn associated with increased angry family behaviors, as rated by spouses,” Lim and her colleagues write. “This suggests that individual emotions do fluctuate on a day-to-day basis in response to incivility at work, and these emotional responses can have consequences even in the home environment.”

According to Christine Pearson and Christine Porath in their book, The Cost of Bad Behavior: How Incivility is Damaging Your Business and What to Do About It, incivility is far more widespread than people realize — and it has devastating effects. Here are just a few of the statistics from their research study of 800 employers. Pearson and Porath define it as “the exchange of seemingly inconsequential inconsiderate words and deeds that violate conventional norms or workplace conduct.” In essence, what is considered ‘uncivil’ is based on an individual’s perceptions of actions or words. Sometimes it is blatant, like:

losing one’s temper or yelling at someone in public;
rude or obnoxious behavior;
badgering or back-stabbing;
withholding important information;
sabotaging a project or damaging someone’s reputation;
arriving late to a meeting;
checking email or texting during a meeting;
not answering calls or responding to emails;
ignoring or interrupting someone.

Incivility Online and in the Media

According to a study by Angelo Antoci and colleagues published in PLOS ONE, there is growing evidence that “online incivility” is spreading across social networking sites (SNS) making them a potentially hostile environment for users. The authors cite a Pew Research Center (PRC) study “which has documented the rising incidence of incivility in SNS-based interactions: for example, 73% of online adults have seen someone being harassed in some way in SNS, and 40% have personally experienced it. 92% of Internet users agreed that SNS-mediated interaction allows people to be more rude and aggressive, compared with their offline experiences. The Facebook and the Twitter accounts of actors of public interest such as political parties, magazines, and celebrities provide a typical setting for online incivility.”

Many mainstream media outlets have changed from reporting the factual news and honest commentary to either tools of the government or political parties; reporting lies and false information; and focusing more on entertainment and sensationalism. Add to that the fact that a large percentage of the American public receives their news from unverified reports on Facebook, and the results can fuel incivility quickly and pervasively.

A Pew Research Centre survey published in 2014 reported that 70% of 18-to-24-year-olds who use the Internet had experienced harassment, and 26% of women that age said they’d been stalked online. A 2014 study published in the psychology journal Personality and Individual Differences found that the approximately 25% Internet users who self-identified as trolls scored extremely high in the dark trait of malignant narcissism.

Whitney Phillips, a literature professor at Mercer University and the author of This Is Why We Can’t Have Nice Things: Mapping the Relationship Between Online Trolling and Mainstream Culture, argues: “Trolls are portrayed as aberrational and antithetical to how normal people converse with each other. And that could not be further from the truth,” says Phillips, “These are mostly normal people who do things that seem fun at the time that have huge implications. You want to say this is the bad guys, but it’s a problem of us.” “We don’t just have a trolling problem,” Phillips argues; “we have a culture problem. This Is Why We Can’t Have Nice Things isn’t only about trolls; it’s about a culture in which trolls thrive.”

The way in which we use our smartphones can also be a reflection of incivility and rudeness, whether it’s the person yelling into their phone in a crowded place such as transit or a restaurant or texting someone else during a conversation with the person you are with.

Incivility in Political Life

A U.S. News & World Report by John Marks titled “Incivility in America,” reported: “As a new poll conducted in February by U.S. News and Bozell Worldwide reveals, a vast majority of Americans feel their country has reached an ill-mannered watershed. Nine out of 10 Americans think incivility is a serious problem, and nearly half think it is extremely serious. Seventy-eight percent say the problem has worsened in the past 10 years, and their concern goes beyond annoyance at rudeness. Respondents see in incivility evidence of a profound social breakdown. More than 90 percent of those polled believe it contributes to the increase of violence in the country; 85 percent believe it divides the national community, and the same number see it eroding healthy values like respect for others.”

Nowhere is the problem of incivility more prominent than in politics with political discourse between candidates degenerating into attack ads and even threats of violence. The NAACP published a report exposing what it calls links between the GOP and racist hate groups in the United States, such as white-supremacist groups, anti-immigrant organizations and militias. The NAACP report, which counts among its authors, Leonard Zeskind, one of the country’s foremost scholars of white nationalism, says the right wing portion of the Republican Party has become a site for recruitment by white supremacists and far right wing groups such as QAnon.Fear and anxiety is spreading among Americans regarding their political system. 70% think civility has worsened since President Trump’s election. Unsurprisingly, trust in essential institutions — especially Congress — has plummeted. Nearly 60% report checking out of politics because of the increasingly negative tone.

A 2019 WeberShandwick report, “Civility in America 2019: Solutions for Tomorrow,” shined light on concerning statistics: 93% of respondents think incivility is a problem; 68% see it as a crisis; and 74% think it’s getting worse.

A study by Larry Diamond, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute, and Tod Lindberg a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and Lilliana Mason at the University of Maryland, report, based on their study last October: “ Like a growing number of prominent American leaders and scholars, we are increasingly anxious that this country is headed toward the worst post-election crisis in a century and a half. Our biggest concern is that a disputed presidential election — especially if there are close contests in a few swing states, or if one candidate denounces the legitimacy of the process — could generate violence and bloodshed.” Their study also found the following:

“36 percent of Republicans and 33 percent of Democrats said it is at least “a little” justified for their side “to use violence in advancing political goals” — up from 30 percent of both Republicans and Democrats in June.”
“All together, about 1 in 5 Americans with a strong political affiliation says they are quite willing to endorse violence if the other party wins the presidency.”
“Furthermore, two of us have found in our research that violent events tend to increase public approval of political violence — potentially creating a vicious cycle even if violence is sparked in only a few spots.”
“However, we fear we are now headed into such a severe downward spiral of partisan polarization that we cannot rely on the candidates and campaigns to pull us out of it.”

The Prevailing Business Model Business Leaders Contribute to the Problem

Trump ’s Apprentice TV show, where viewers eagerly awaited Trump’s now famous edict — “you’re fired” — as some kind of pleasure, epitomizes how some people think leaders should behave. And participants on the show were prepared to endure insults and abusive comments by Trump all in the hope of being the successful choice.

Here’s some other examples:

Oracle co-founder and CEO Larry Ellison and one of the richest men in the world, calling the HP board “idiots” for firing Mark Hurd, and ridiculing SAP co-founder Hass Plattner’s “wild Einstein hair” in an email to the Wall Street Journal or even dissing Bill Gates as not being so smart as he was, as reported by Brad Stone and Aaron Ricadela, writing in Bloomsberg BusinessWeek.

Uber CEO Travis Kalalnick who was forced to resign as CEO because he damaged Uber’s reputation with revelations of sexual harassment in its offices, and allegations of trade secrets theft and which prompted a federal investigation into efforts to mislead local government regulators.

Stanley Bing wrote in his book, Crazy Bosses “So it is today, where bullying behavior is encouraged and rewarded in range of business enterprises. The style itself is applauded in boardrooms and in business publications like Business Week, as ‘tough,’ ‘no nonsense,’ ‘hard as nails.’ When you see these code words, you know you’re dealing with the bully boss…thanks to the admiration in which bully management is held in American business and academic gurus who perpetuate the techniques.”

Little is said in mainstream U.S. media or public discussion about how the continuing obsession with short-term profits and the awarding of exorbitant executive pay actually contributes to a culture of incivility because both are based on the exploitation of the general public. And they are often accompanied with low wages, union-busting, outsourcing traditional jobs, and the abuse of workers reclassified as “independent contractors.” These changes compounded worker vulnerability in those workplaces already left to the tender mercies of “at-will employment,” a workplace regime dating from the 19th century and unique to the U.S. among Western countries.

The Bystander Problem

When an act of incivility occurs, whether it’s road rage, uncivil behavior on a subway or street or in the workplace or school, there’s increasing evidence that people witnessing those events are increasingly less willing to intervene. This is often referred to as the bystander effect.

Why do some people speak up or act, when others stay silent and do nothing, when an act of injustice or incivility takes place? On the one hand, you might hypothesize that people who are more aggressive or hostile by nature are more likely to openly challenge a stranger. On the other hand, speaking out against injustice could be seen in a more positive light, as an act of maturity. Emerging research supports the latter idea — that people who stand up to incivility have a strong sense of altruism, combined with self-confidence.

There have been many documented accounts of why average German citizens didn’t speak up and oppose the actions of Adolph Hitler and the Nazis during WWII, which certaintly was a contributing factor to his rise to power.

Psychologist Alexandrina Moisuc and her colleagues recently published findings in the journal Social Psychology from three studies looking at the personality profile possessed by people who say they would intervene in the face of bad behavior. Although there has been extensive research on how situational factors can impact people’s motivation to intervene (i.e. research on the bystander effect), there have been fewer studies looking at the role of personality.

The researchers tested two competing and equally plausible theories about who stands up: the “bitter complainer” versus the “well-adjusted leader.” The “bitter complainer” theory suggests that hostile, aggressive, and insecure people are more likely to become vigilantes out of a desire to unleash displaced frustration onto an unsuspecting target. In contrast, the “well-adjusted leader” theory takes the view that people who intervene are more likely to be confident, stable, and mature.

Overall, their findings seemed to support the “well-adjusted leader” theory rather than the “bitter complainer” hypothesis. People who said they would react to the behaviors depicted in the videos felt more moral outrage (i.e. stronger feelings of anger and disgust), but they did not appear to be inherently more aggressive than other people, as measured by a personality scale. Instead, they scored higher on a measure of altruism, suggesting that their motivation to act was coming from a place of wanting to help others rather than harm the person engaging in the bad behavior.

Moisuc and her colleagues found that people who stand up in the face of uncivil behaviors are the opposite of complainers. Instead they seem to possess traits that characterize upstanding citizens: a strong desire to help others, self-confidence, security in one’s place in society, and maturity in handling their own emotions.

The Experts Weigh In

Pier M. Forni, an award-winning professor of Italian Literature and founder of The Civility Initiative at Johns Hopkins University and author of The Civility Solution: What to Do When People are Rude says “Incivility and bullying behavior is also often a precursor to physical violence.” Forni says feelings of insecurity only exacerbate the problem. “When we are insecure or not sure of ourselves for whatever the reason because the economy is bad, or we think we are going to lose our jobs … very often we shift the burden of that insecurity upon others in the form of hostility,” he says. “It is the kick-the-dog syndrome. You make an innocent pay for how badly you feel in order to find some kind of relief.”

Writing in the Canadian Journal of Cultural Studies, Roddey Reid, a professor of cultural studies at the University of California contends, “Although a universal problem, bullying enjoys a virulence and prevalence in contemporary U.S. culture virtually unmatched anywhere else in terms of its reach, depth, and legitimacy. Unlike in many European nations and Canada it is not illegal in the U.S.” Reid argues that Americans should not be surprised at the levels of incivility. It’s not like there wasn’t ample warning. “So much macho bluster. Strutting around, talking tough. But following close behind came the actions: fire-bombings of abortion clinics, serial capital executions, gay bashings — not to mention ‘three-strikes’ laws and mandatory sentencing that send citizens off to long prison terms for petty drug offenses, tripling the U.S. prison population within twenty years. Next to come in for brutal treatment were the schools and workplaces: from the presence of police in hallways and zero tolerance drug tests to factory closings and the downsizing of middle-management, to the cutting and privatization of public services and government programs. Even the Post Office became a ‘profit centre of excellence’ meant to compete with private sector enterprises; it also became a centre of workplace violence and shootings,” Reid says.

In the The Case for Civility: And Why Our Future Depends On It well-known author Os Guinness argues that civility needs to be rebuilt in the US if it is to survive as a democracy: “Civility must truly be restored. It is not to be confused with niceness and mere etiquette or dismissed as squeamishness about differences. It is a tough, robust, substantive concept… and a manner of conduct that will be decisive for the future of the American republic”.

But to dismiss signs of courtesy as mere symbols and to argue that what matters is not the outward trappings misses the point, said Richard Boyd, an associate professor of government at Georgetown University. “To fail to be civil to someone — to treat them harshly, rudely or condescendingly — is not only to be guilty of bad manners,” he wrote in an article, “The Value of Civility?” for the journal Urban Studies. “It also, and more ominously, signals a disdain or contempt for them as moral beings. Treating someone rudely, brusquely or condescendingly says loudly and clearly that you do not regard her as your equal.”

Incivility During the Pandemic

A new study by Larry Martinez and Lauren Park at Portland State University published in the Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, found that “Workplace incivility is on the rise, and a new study found that employees who experience or witness incivilities are more likely to be uncivil to others — a worrying trend that could intensify as people return to in-person work.” “People have gotten used to not having to engage in interpersonal communication as much and that can take an already distressing or tense situation and exacerbate it because people are out of practice of not having to have difficult conversations,” said Larry Martinez, associate professor of industrial-organizational psychology and co-author of the study. “These spirals that we’re seeing might be stronger in a post-pandemic world.”

According to a Microsoft study in 2020 and 2021 , instances of online incivility have increased during the pandemic. At least that’s the perception shared by the 11,000 participants from 22 countries in this study. . Of all the people surveyed, 82% perceived a decline in online civility since the first measures against Covid-19 were implemented. The survey compares results from June 2020, which showed rather encouraging results. For example, the statement “People have been more encouraging to each other” dropped by 8 points, from 57% last year to 49%. It’s hard to argue with these numbers as there has been a greater sense of distrust on social networks since the pandemic began. The percentage of those agreeing with the statement “I see more people helping other people” has dropped to 56%, compared to 67% last year. Not surprisingly, the feeling of “a greater sense of community” has also dropped significantly, from 62% to 50% in July 2021.

You would think that with the shift from working at the employer’s office or place of work to more remote work would result in a decline in incivility because of less personal contact during the pandemic. But one research study shows a transference of incivility has taken place in emails, which were used more often in remote work.

With the caps lock key and the stroke of an exclamation point, your co-worker has just done the equivalent of shouting at you across the office,” University of Illinois academics Zhenyu Yuan and YoungAh Park, write in Scientific American.

Their research, published in the Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, says it’s time to start taking “email incivility” seriously. Not all rudeness is deliberate, but it can still grind you down — even affecting your sleep.

Email rudeness comes in two flavours, the researchers say — ‘active’ and ‘passive’. Active email rudeness is perhaps the easiest to define. It could be an angry email from a disgruntled client where the recipient (often not the person who has caused the perceived problem) gets both barrels — sometimes in CAPS LOCK.

Passive rudeness is harder to define. It could be not replying to an email for days on end, or not acknowledging a part of an email. Which then leaves the other person wondering — is that person really ignoring me, or just really busy?

Whether or not it’s deliberate, email rudeness can still hurt. According to the two studies that informed the paper, active incivility is more likely.

Managers also need to take a lead in countering email incivility — especially in a time when staff are already stressed. Flexibility and clarity around expectations is key. Avoid the temptation to send a message at 4:45pm just to test workers are still online, advises Harvard Business School professor Tsedal Neeley. And if a manager emails on a Sunday, they should make it clear that the reply can come on Monday.

Picking the right form of communication can also help, found a McKinsey study on remote working in China during the pandemic. Chats or video conferencing could help lessen the email deluge, for instance.

Matteo Bonotti and Steven Zech have written a book titled Recovering Civility During COVID-19 in which they say “throughout the pandemic we have seen general disregard for basic etiquette and appropriate norms of interaction, overtly immoral acts of discrimination and hate, and policies that fail to fully incorporate an understanding of the emerging scientific evidence about the virus and its social effects.”

Moreover, the authors argue “we continue to see ongoing challenges to expectations around mask wearing and an increasingly vocal vaccine hesitancy movement. These forms of opposition often take on impolite, if not rude and disparaging, modes of expression. When individuals hold intractable anti-mask beliefs, confrontations have the potential to escalate into incidents of extreme violence. Coalitions appear to be forming around what advocates describe as ‘health freedom’”.

Benotti and Zech contend that “COVID-19 also caused disruption to norms of politeness in such environments as restaurants, bars, and cafés. People recognised many of these challenges to etiquette and politeness norms early on during the pandemic. Both experts and popular news outlets provided some basic advice on behaviours when restaurants reopened after mandatory shutdowns, and the public was able to draw from some guidance regarding the new “dos and don’ts.

The authors note that “different forms of discrimination and hatred that emerged during the pandemic (some government-driven, others in the workplace, and within society more broadly) threaten moral civility and the free and equal status of citizens, especially members of vulnerable groups. For example, political leaders can use crises like the COVID-19 pandemic to advance political agendas that foster higher levels of racism and discrimination against some groups in society, or that degrade liberal democratic institutions. Politicians might also use the public health crisis as cover for an ongoing assault against liberal democratic institutions and freedoms.”

What’s To Be Done

The Need for Action During the Pandemic

While America may be on its way to controlling the deadly impact of his pandemic, it will not be the last one. Scientists agree that we will experience future serious pandemics due to the open human and goods movement globally.

Benotti and Zech argue “There is an urgent need to respond to these challenges if we want to prevent an escalation of moral and justificatory incivility. We suggested a number of ways in which governments and citizens can undertake this endeavour. When it comes to moral civility, governments can take steps towards more inclusive policies that can reduce discrimination and improve conditions for marginalized segments of the population. This might involve multi-pronged strategies that include consistent messaging as well as translation, consultation, and co-design of policies. Furthermore, policymakers can help counteract increases in racism and hate speech by identifying their causes, monitoring and collecting data, engaging with civil society actors, employing media and new technologies for programme delivery, and improving legal mechanisms like hate speech laws.”

A Consortium of university social scientists launched the Civility Project, at first just to study the problem. With the Beacon Journal’s involvement, their efforts have evolved to propose a set of standards which will soon become a public civility metric, inspired by Politifact’s Truth-o-meter.

The Consortium believes that to move away from incivility, U.S. institutions and business need to set standards for civility in public discourse and use these standards to identify and publicize moments of incivility in public discourse.

From this perspective, the Consortium suggests there are pillars of civility:

The ability to express an opinion while respecting other people.
The ability to acknowledge the fact that opinions differ among people.
The ability to engage in constructive dialogue with other people.
Civility disagrees with other opinions without disparaging other people.
Civility disagrees with other opinions without deriding other people’s opinions.

“A national public education campaign endorsed by political leaders, schools, PTAs and corporate America and distributed through the media might be an important first step towards bringing civility back to our shores,” argues Jack Leslie, Chairman of Weber Shandwick.

A second step may have to be legislation that proscribes incivility. In the U.S., 20 states are exploring legislation that would put bullying on the legal radar screen. In Canada, several have passed legislation that addresses workplace bullying, although both countries are far behind some European nations and New Zealand.

Final Thoughts

Incivility in America has been an increasing concern of the public, and the COVID-19 pandemic has contributed to the problem. It’s a pervasive problem that permeates society and needs to be addressed. Otherwise one of the cornerstones of democracy will be shattered and could contribute to its collapse.

Follow me on Twitter: @raybwilliams