Dialogue of the Deaf: How Deliberation With Discontented Citizens May Hopelessly Fail

ABSTRACT Governments employ public deliberation in response to citizen discontent, intending to achieve consensus, mutual understanding, and clarification. However, some studies suggest that deliberation can devolve into a “dialogue of the deaf,” where parties talk past each other, counterproductively leading to conflict, distrust, and confusion. Remarkably, there is limited theoretical and empirical research on how deliberation leads to such adverse outcomes. To explore this, the study examines a Dutch city's 5G rollout that unexpectedly sparked discontent. Using documents and visual materials, the mutual communication between the local government and discontented citizens is analyzed through the theoretical lens of deliberative standards as perceived by both parties. The findings reveal that a dialogue of the deaf arises from differing perceptions of whether their interactions meet the standards of good deliberation: respect, inclusion, reason, common good orientation, reciprocity, and accountability. This research highlights the need for meta‐deliberation to address undiscussed perceptions on good deliberation.