SHUTESBURY - Just before the 2000 election cycle, legendary Washington Post columnist David Broder wrote a column about the growing blue-red political divide in the United States. The results of the 2000 election did nothing to lessen that divide. Conservatives and liberals still debate the outcome of that election - and pretty much every political development in the past decade.

The evolution of communication over the past decade has not been pretty. Gone are the days of civil discourse. Verbal bullying dominates the airwaves, blog and chat boards, as conservatives and liberals yell at each other on news talks shows.

There was a day when those with differing viewpoints would share thoughts in a civil manner - and walk away with a little growth. Maybe your point of view didn't change, but perhaps you walked away understanding the other side's view, and maybe grew your own worldview at the same time.

The Internet was in its infancy when Broder wrote his column. For those of us long involved in Web journalism, one of the hopes of the Internet is that the worldwide citizenry would use technology to become better informed. All too often, the opposite happens. In the past decade, a number of studies have pointed to how news consumers increasingly seek out information that supports their preconceived beliefs.

The search for facts has been displaced all too often by the "if you're not with me, you're against me" approach. In the past decade, citizens have been barraged by journalists and politicians using tactics of fear and misinformation on topics important as well as silly. Those tactics are so commonplace they have seemingly become the norm. It's a disturbing trend and one we've also seen in Shutesbury given the hornet's nest of a debate over a new library.

If you've driven up West Pelham Road into Shutesbury over the past week, you couldn't help but miss the intimidating signs stating: "Vote No Or $$ The Consequences." The signs are ostensibly in reaction to the "Yes" signs that have dotted Shutesbury lawns over the two months and became a subject of controversy after reports that signs were stolen.

The "Vote No Or Else" signs are the latest scare tactic employed by those opposing construction of the new library and community center. Threatening huge increases in taxes is a well-worn political tactic. And it works sometimes. Those opposed to the new $3.5 million library mobilized with a successful misinformation campaign that helped defeat the Proposition 2½ debt-exclusion override vote Nov. 8 by 41 votes.

Since that vote, library supporters have been involved in a get-out-the-vote effort as well as a get-out-the-facts effort. Still, misinformation pervades this proposal.

Mary Anne Antonellis, the library director, reported Thursday that opponents to the library continued this week to send out mailings containing misleading information. To their credit, library supporters have spent a good amount of time since the November defeat trying to distribute accurate information. Efforts have included door-to-door efforts, public information sessions, Facebook pages and updates and an information-filled Web site.

As a journalist and journalism educator, I prefer facts over fears. But will Shutesbury residents cast votes rooted in fear or rooted in reality and hope for the future? Tough to tell. But if voters take a hard look at the facts, it's hard not to see this proposal as a pretty good deal:

• With the average Shutesbury property evaluation at $243,814, the cost to taxpayers for a town loan of $1.4 million plus interest over 22 years breaks down to $8.60 a month or $103.15 annually.

• The cost drops with just a $1 million loan to $6.14 a month or $73.68 a year.

• The goal of library supporters is to raise $400,000 so the town would need to borrow no more than $1 million.

• Library supporters have raised $166,000 in pledges and donations for the project, most since the grant was awarded in July.

Those don't appear to be numbers worthy of fear-mongering.

So, what is the real issue here?

Again, tough to tell. Some old-timers may feel that the Library/Community Center will change the character of the town. But for a town that prides itself on the idea of "community," this library/community center is an opportunity to bring diverse people together in one space.

And, it's a pretty good deal. If this plan doesn't go through, the town essentially leaves a state grant worth $2.1 million on the table. That's not a smart fiscal strategy. I would be afraid to pass on such a good deal.

Steve Fox lives in Shutesbury.