May 2013 - Air-L - lists.aoir.org

Travel grants (was: Let's talk about AoIR)
by Alexander Halavais 30 May '13

30 May '13

Hello, Eduardo: There is a small travel grant available, which will not cover travel from most places but may help. And those applying from Asia, Africa, and South America are particularly targeted. More information here: http://aoir.org/ir14-0-travel-grant-applications/ A list of our keynote and plenaries may be found here: http://ir14.aoir.org/speakers/ Hope to see you in Denver. Best, Alex On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 11:09 AM, eduardo erazo acosta <rueduardo2000(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > Good Day, > > I researcher in education and Internet in Colombia > > Can anyone tell me if there are scholarships for travel? > > and power particuipar speaker at the conference this year?? > > THANKS ¡¡ > > ::::::::::::::::: > > >> Date: Thu, 30 May 2013 11:00:22 -0700 >> From: halavais(a)gmail.com >> To: jhunsinger(a)wlu.ca >> CC: >> Subject: Re: [Air-L] Let's talk about AoIR. >> >> OK, so I want to separate the word-count issue from the template >> issue, because they are divisible and too easily conflated. >> >> TEMPLATE >> >> On the template issue: we've been through this once before, but the >> reason the template exists is to give some structure for proceedings. >> I made the argument--and have made the argument since I ran for >> VP--that I wanted what goes on at AoIR to reach a wider audience, and >> to spread beyond those who can attend the conference each year. Many >> of you running for Exec have expressed a similar interest, and have >> proposed various mechanisms for accomplishing this. For me, getting >> our work out in some form so that it was findable on the web was >> important. >> >> The template exists because to be able to find and use stuff in a >> collection, it is easier if there is some structural similarity--you >> know where to find the title, the author, etc. There is nothing, at >> least to my mind, that says "hard science" in that. Yes, there was a >> format for subtitles (in case it's not obvious from this email, I >> quite like subtitles), and tables, etc., but none of this required >> their use. >> >> Maybe the issue is APA for the citation style? I frankly couldn't care >> less about citation styles, and didn't pick it. This seemed to be the >> most common style used in most previous IR conferences, but that >> doesn't mean it should predominate. I don't see why it can't be "use >> whatever you want as long as it is findable"--APA was arbitrary. >> Perhaps that is what signals "hard science"? Would, by contrast, MLA >> or Chicago then signal "Humanities"? >> >> I think there is value in getting our work out there. I think asking >> people to share what they do at AoIR is valuable. I suspect that a >> number of others do too. But I think there should also be options for >> not sharing. It may be (with deep apologies to Suely and Andrew, who >> have invested a lot of time and effort here) that SPIR just isn't >> worthy of ongoing support. >> >> WORD COUNT >> >> On the word count issue: One of the reason I've separated these is >> that I've heard largely support for the longer limits, with a few >> grumblings about 1,200 being too short. We've had a number of >> restrictions in the past, ranging from 250 to 1000. What I've heard >> consistently during my 8 years on Exec is people saying that it's hard >> to judge work based on two or three paragraphs alone, and that this >> results a bad refereeing process. I think the 500 word limit favors >> those who can write good abstracts. I count myself in that number--my >> longer work may not be that great, but I write an awesome 500 word >> abstract. That said, there were no such limits on roundtables, and >> some of the proposals were quite short. >> >> We have allowed full papers for the last couple (three?) years, but >> the number of papers submitted was vanishingly small, and a >> nine-thousand word paper requires a disproportionate amount of >> reviewer time. >> >> REVIEWING >> >> Finally, on the issue of reviews, I want to thank those who >> volunteered to review this year. I'll note that many of you did not, >> meaning that (a) your expertise was missing when it came to assign >> reviews and (b) the reviewers who were assigned often had more reviews >> than we have assigned in the past. I agree we need to provide better >> guidance to reviewers, and some of you (reviewers and authors) will >> hear from me soon about helping shape that process. But the first step >> is to be willing to put time into reviewing. >> >> I just want to be very clear that there was a range of excellent >> reviewing and reviewing that could have been much better, from a range >> of early-career scholars and more experienced reviewers. Regardless of >> this, I think our reviewers deserve a significant amount of praise and >> respect for volunteering to review. >> >> Alex >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Jeremy hunsinger <jhunsinger(a)wlu.ca> >> wrote: >> > I think the problem in part is that it was a template that said it was >> > for a >> > paper, and not a template that said it was for a proposal or abstract. >> > This combined with the required length, added considerably to the lack >> > of >> > clarity. I think we need to go back to the 'those that need to submit >> > full >> > papers for them to count, can submit full papers' but those papers are >> > not >> > automatically submitted for publication, and the other track should be a >> > simple 500 word abstract, or longer panel abstract. the clarity of the >> > two >> > track system was again slightly problematic, but it was inclusive in >> > ways >> > that this system is not >> > >> > >> > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Alexander Halavais <halavais(a)gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> It would be helpful, at least to me, if folks could be more explicit >> >> about *what* they objected to in the template. There were no content >> >> restrictions. Yes, there were spaces for citations, subtitles, and for >> >> a title, but if these were omitted, they were omitted. >> >> >> >> I am well aware of the power of defaults, but I'm missing what it was >> >> about this particular template that makes it difficult. (Yes, I've >> >> heard from folks that the word-count was restrictive, but that isn't >> >> directly a template issue.) >> >> >> >> Best, >> >> >> >> Alex >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Feona Attwood <f.attwood(a)mdx.ac.uk> >> >> wrote: >> >> > Thanks for bringing this up Terri. I know lots of people have had >> >> > similar feelings and feel awkward about how to express it. >> >> > >> >> > My feeling is that the new format for submitting proposals seems to >> >> > signal a real shift in style. I haven't come across anything like >> >> > that >> >> > before, not even for really dull conferences and I didn't put a >> >> > proposal in >> >> > this year because I couldn't work out a way to fit what I do into >> >> > that kind >> >> > of format. It seems designed to filter out anything imaginative, >> >> > innovative, speculative or original. The papers I reviewed in that >> >> > format >> >> > were really difficult to read; the format had squashed all the life >> >> > out of >> >> > them. I had felt very enthused after last year's conference which >> >> > seemed >> >> > very lively and friendly - and then really deflated by the submission >> >> > process this year. I'm hoping it was an experiment that won't be >> >> > continued. >> >> > I'm still planning to attend this year but I can't imagine submitting >> >> > anything again if this is the new direction AoIR is taking. >> >> > Feona >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > On 30 May 2013, at 15:27, Terri Senft wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> Hi Pals, >> >> >> >> >> >> With the encouragement of Andrew and Alex, I wanted to approach the >> >> >> list >> >> >> regarding some questions I have about culture of the Association of >> >> >> Internet Researchers today. >> >> >> >> >> >> I'm asking because after this round of conference proposal reviews, >> >> >> I >> >> >> feel >> >> >> personally and professionally a bit disconnected from this group >> >> >> these >> >> >> days. This freaks me out a bit, because I've always thought of AoIR >> >> >> as >> >> >> my >> >> >> intellectual home. I am wondering if this is just me (which would be >> >> >> fine!), or if others are in struggle as well. >> >> >> >> >> >> Some Big Questions I Have: >> >> >> >> >> >> 1. Who are we, personally and professionally? What makes us the same >> >> >> as >> >> >> organizations like ICA or ACM? What makes us different from these >> >> >> organizations? >> >> >> >> >> >> 2. How do we perform our identity at our annual conference? How is >> >> >> it >> >> >> reflected in the way we phrase our calls for submissions? How is it >> >> >> reflected in submission procedures? >> >> >> >> >> >> 3. How do we want to define "rigorous scholarship" in our >> >> >> organization? >> >> >> How >> >> >> do we want to deal with scholarship that strikes us as urgent, >> >> >> necessary or >> >> >> fresh, but not sufficiently rigorous? >> >> >> >> >> >> 4. Is there even an "us" anymore? Can positivists, activists, and >> >> >> artists >> >> >> really sit in the same room and discuss 'internet studies'? My >> >> >> answer >> >> >> used >> >> >> to be affirmative, but that was before internet studies was as >> >> >> ubiquitous >> >> >> as literature studies. >> >> >> >> >> >> 5. Should the desire for a conference that showcases >> >> >> professionalization >> >> >> trump a desire for a conference that encourages its youngest >> >> >> scholars >> >> >> and >> >> >> its most senior ones to take risks, make mistakes and push the >> >> >> boundaries >> >> >> of the field? >> >> >> >> >> >> Okay, that's plenty to start. As they say in AA, take what you want >> >> >> and >> >> >> leave the rest. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Fondly, >> >> >> T >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> <http://goog_689013053> >> >> >> >> >> >> <http://goog_689013053> >> >> >> >> >> >> Dr. Theresa M. Senft >> >> >> Global Liberal Studies Program >> >> >> School of Arts & Sciences >> >> >> New York University >> >> >> 726 Broadway NY NY 10003 >> >> >> >> >> >> home: *www.terrisenft.net <http://goog_689013053>** >> >> >> *(needs a serious updating) >> >> >> facebook: www.facebook.com/theresa.senft >> >> >> twitter: @terrisenft >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> >> The Air-L(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> >> >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers >> >> >> http://aoir.org >> >> >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> >> >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> >> >> >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> >> >> http://www.aoir.org/ >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Please note that Middlesex University's preferred way of receiving >> >> > all >> >> > correspondence is via email in line with our Environmental Policy. >> >> > All >> >> > incoming post to Middlesex University is opened and scanned by our >> >> > digital >> >> > document handler, CDS, and then emailed to the recipient. >> >> > >> >> > If you do not want your correspondence to Middlesex University >> >> > processed >> >> > in this way please email the recipient directly. Parcels, couriered >> >> > items >> >> > and recorded delivery items will not be opened or scanned by CDS. >> >> > There are >> >> > items which are "exceptions" which will be opened by CDS but will not >> >> > be >> >> > scanned a full list of these can be obtained by contacting the >> >> > University. >> >> > >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> >> > The Air-L(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> >> > is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers >> >> > http://aoir.org >> >> > Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> >> > http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> > >> >> > Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> >> > http://www.aoir.org/ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> -- >> >> // >> >> // This email is >> >> // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. >> >> // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. >> >> // >> >> // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberflâneur >> >> // http://alex.halavais.net >> >> // >> >> // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. >> >> // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> The Air-L(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> >> http://www.aoir.org/ >> > >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> -- >> // >> // This email is >> // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. >> // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. >> // >> // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberflâneur >> // http://alex.halavais.net >> // >> // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. >> // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.) >> _______________________________________________ >> The Air-L(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: >> http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> http://www.aoir.org/ -- -- // // This email is // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [x] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberflâneur // http://alex.halavais.net // // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.)

1 0

Voting Open & A Question for Candidates
by Alexander Halavais 30 May '13

30 May '13

Dear AoIR Members (and members of the broader community), Just a reminder that AoIR elections are now open, and will be until the end of the month. I want to encourage all members to vote. There are lots of ways to help contribute to and shape the future of an organization like ours, and electing an executive committee that represents your interests is one of these. I have not yet voted and I'm hoping the candidates can answer a question for me. (And I hope others will ask questions as well, despite the looming deadline!) I've looked over your candidate statements (linked here: http://aoir.org/2013-executive-committee-election-candidate-statements-voti… ) and I recognize and agree with the need to increase connections among members outside of the conference setting--something that several of you noted. That said, I wonder what single, concrete change you would most like to see in the conferences themselves, and how you might suggest bringing that about. What would you like to see in, say, Bangkok for 2014 that we haven't seen in previous conferences? (If anything!) And what can you do to help make that happen? Thank you all for running, and I look forward to your responses. Best, Alex -- -- // // This email is // [x] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberflâneur // http://alex.halavais.net // // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.)

9 13

aoir
by Hillis, Ken 30 May '13

30 May '13

Thanks Terri, Feona and others who are raising this very important issue. I, for one, am seriously wondering, after reading the reviews from two panels I agreed to moderate, what AoIR is now about. One panel was accepted and was was rejected, yet both used the now 'discredited' and 'outmoded' format of submission used in previous years, in part because organizers strongly indicated after a flurry of concerned emails many months back that no proposal would be discriminated against if it used the old fomat. Yet this is precisely what did happen--one panel was accepted (with 2 reviews) and the other rejected (with 4 reviews, two of which were glowing and two of which picked the proposal apart on the basis of not conforming to the new format--even as one of them overtly stated her/his discomfort in doing so given the overall conference thematic of resistance/appropriation. I am a humanities scholar who happens to very much respect social science approaches--this is an issue that we, as a department of communication studies (I'm incoming Chair) have been grappling with now for more than two years and we're very much focused on ways that humanities and social science approaches can complement one another. I thought AoIR was about this as well, or at least it seems that it used to be organized along those lines. But, something has changed and proposals that feature 'theory' now run the risk of rejection on the basis of 'poorly conceived' methods, inadequate description of the entire project (that one is working on proposing almost a full year in advance of presenting) and so forth . . . Perhaps enough for now. I *almost never* post a personal type of email to this list. But I am saddened and, yes, even angered, even as I know it's an all volunteer project. Yet it really felt like it was the algorithm making the decisions this time round . . . Ken Ken Hillis Department Chair and Professor of Media and Technology Studies Department of Communication Studies The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3285 USA

2 1

AoIR & IR14 Deadline Roundup
by Alexander Halavais 30 May '13

30 May '13

Please mark your calendars with the following deadlines, as relevant: May 31 (Tomorrow!): IR14.0 Doctoral Colloquium application due: http://ir14.aoir.org/doctoral-colloquium/ June 1: AoIR Executive Committee voting complete AT NOON ETD: http://aoir.org/2013-executive-committee-election-candidate-statements-voti… June 15: Deadline for "Representing personal history, ability, and reputation online" pre-conference application: http://ir14.aoir.org/preconference-workshop-representing-personal-history-a… July 1: Final copy of paper must be uploaded to ConfTool for inclusion in SPIR: http://conftool.com/aoir-ir14/ July 15: IR14.0 Travel Grant applications due: http://aoir.org/ir14-0-travel-grant-applications/ August 1: Earlybird and presenters' deadline for registration. Note that presenters *must* be registered by this date or their presentation will be removed from the program: http://bit.ly/ir14-register August 1: Deadline for Ignite-IR proposals: http://bit.ly/ignite-ir14 August 1: Preconference abstract deadline (for preconferences requiring abstracts): http://ir14.aoir.org/preconference-workshops/ August 20: Preliminary conference schedule available: http://ir14.aoir.org October 23-26: IR14.0 Conference in Denver: http://ir14.aoir.org October 27-28:: #aoircamp: http://ir14.aoir.org/preconference-workshops/ Finally, I encourage you to reserve your room at the Westin as soon as possible. October is a busy conference month for a busy conference town, but more importantly, we have to make our hotel quota or it results in a substantial cost to the Association and its members.Thank you! Best, Alex

1 0

Final Call: May 31 deadline for submissions to the doctoral colloquium
by Annette Markham 30 May '13

30 May '13

A reminder that if you (or someone you know) is interested in applying for the doctoral colloquium at this year's AOIR conference, the May 31 deadline is approaching. Here's the call: http://ir14.aoir.org/doctoral-colloquium/ If anyone has questions, please feel free to contact me directly, annette ***************************************************** Annette N. Markham, Ph.D. Guest Professor, Department of Informatics, Umeå University, Sweden Affiliate Professor, School of Communication, Loyola University, Chicago amarkham(a)gmail.com http://markham.internetinquiry.org/ Twitter: annettemarkham

1 0

IR 14 Question
by Ted Coopman 30 May '13

30 May '13

All, Has anyone received acceptance/rejection of a panel or roundtable submission? My stand alone paper result came in (out-of-luck) but nothing yet on the roundtable we pitched. -TED -- Ted M. Coopman Ph.D. Lecturer Department of Communication Studies San Jose State University http://www.sjsu.edu/people/ted.coopman/

4 3

Re: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates
by Kelly Quinn 29 May '13

29 May '13

Hi Alex and all, The suggestions from Jeremy, Ruth, Jenny and Darren the conference activities are great. I'd like to see additional opportunities for our members to connect with each other too, so I'd like the Exec Board to go a little further than just 'encourage' our members to get together at other conferences. I'd like to see us establish an informal group of members who will be responsible to organize meet-ups at the various major and not-so-major conferences that our members attend. Informal, because the sole responsibility would be to establish a place and time for AoIR-ists to meet during these other conferences. Group, because to make this work consistently we need people that attend (or reside in host cities) a variety of conferences. This group would simply be charged with opening the AoIR embrace a little wider; we would have additional opportunities to network with each other; and we can get more of our members involved. In the past, a few key members have taken on this responsibility on their own (thank you!), but sharing responsibility among our members to do this on an ongoing and regular basis will sustain the effort and energy. Putting just a little structure around the process would give an opportunity for any of our members to pitch in to make sure these meet-ups take place. Since many of the conference dates and acceptances are out by October, we can collect information and recruit willing volunteers at our annual meeting. Meet-up information can be published on the listserv and also posted on the website. While I anticipate that several members would step up to this role for the 'greater good,' perhaps the Exec Board might even kick in an extra drink ticket at the conference banquet for anyone who organized a meet-up event during the past year ;-) Kelly ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 16:25:46 -0700 From: Alexander Halavais <halavais(a)gmail.com> To: aoir list <air-l(a)aoir.org> Subject: [Air-L] Voting Open & A Question for Candidates Message-ID: <CAKxz=uCM39JsXP75ES0Hh7Bqspwm-feq6W2tejCJgy47HPZjrw(a)mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Dear AoIR Members (and members of the broader community), Just a reminder that AoIR elections are now open, and will be until the end of the month. I want to encourage all members to vote. There are lots of ways to help contribute to and shape the future of an organization like ours, and electing an executive committee that represents your interests is one of these. I have not yet voted and I'm hoping the candidates can answer a question for me. (And I hope others will ask questions as well, despite the looming deadline!) I've looked over your candidate statements (linked here: http://aoir.org/2013-executive-committee-election-candidate-statements-votin g-information/ ) and I recognize and agree with the need to increase connections among members outside of the conference setting--something that several of you noted. That said, I wonder what single, concrete change you would most like to see in the conferences themselves, and how you might suggest bringing that about. What would you like to see in, say, Bangkok for 2014 that we haven't seen in previous conferences? (If anything!) And what can you do to help make that happen? Thank you all for running, and I look forward to your responses. Best, Alex -- -- // // This email is // [x] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [ ] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais, ciberfl?neur // http://alex.halavais.net // // Please attribute any stupid errors above to autocorrect on my phone. // (But I probably was typing on a keyboard.)

5 4

CeDEM13: A Summary
by Noella Edelmann 29 May '13

29 May '13

The CeDEM13 Conference for eDemocracy and Open Government was held 20-23 May 2013 in Krems and saw keynotes held by Beth Noveck, Karine Nahon, Johna Carlo Bertot and Tiago Peixoto. Presenters and attendees came from 23 countries, allowing for interesting conversations and networking opportunities. If you were unable to attend, then you can read the summary on our blog http://digitalgovernment.wordpress.com/2013/05/28/summary-cedem13/ The blog covers all the keynotes, the presenters, the sessions, the ppts.! Or take a look at the photos https://secure.flickr.com/photos/e-governance/sets/72157633602959048/ or and watch the films: http://www.youtube.com/user/eGovernanceKrems CeDEM13 Proceedings The CeDEM13 proceedings will soon be available online (OA) as a pdf, and in book format by the end of summer. We will let you know when they are ready! CeDEM13 and the Open Access eJournal for e-Democracy and Open Government (JeDEM) The best CeDEM13 papers will be published in a special issue of JeDEM later this year. If you are interested in submitting a paper for the current call, please see: http://www.jedem.org/announcement/view/9 Come to CeDEM14! CeDEM14 will be held 21-23 May 2014 in Krems * more details to be found on our website www.donau-uni.ac.at/cedem or stay tuned by following us on @e_society or signing up for our newsletter (http://egov.donau-uni.ac.at/mailman/listinfo/edem) Noella Noella Edelmann BA, MSc, MAS Researcher CeDEM13 Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government www.donau-uni.ac.at/cedem JeDEM eJournal of eDemocracy and Open Government www.jedem.org Digital Government Blog http://digitalgovernment.wordpress.com/ Centre for E-Government Danube University Krems Dr.-Karl-Dorrek-Strasse 30 3500 Krems Austria www.donau-uni.ac.at/egov

1 0

connexions journal special issues: Call for Guest Editors
by connexions journal 29 May '13

29 May '13

connexions • international professional communication journal encourages the development of insightful and innovative topics and approaches on international professional communication through its Special Issues. You are cordially invited to take a leading role in this process by guest editing a special issue of connexions: - *Special Issue 2(2): June 2014* - *Special Issue 3(1): February 2015* - *Special Issue 3(2): June 2015* - *Special Issue 3(3): December 2015* - *Special Issue 4(1): February 2016* - *Special Issue 4(2): June 2016* - *Special Issue 4(3): December 2016* The general requirements for guest editing a special issue of connexions* * are: - Special Issues are organized by a minimum of 2, and a maximum of 3 Guest Editors. - Guest Editors are recognized experts in the area they are proposing for the Special Issue. - Guest Editors are from different institutions and, preferably, from different countries. - Special Issues reflect the international aims and scope of the journal. Therefore, Special Issues include authors from at least 3 countries. The journal publishes four types of articles: - *Original research articles* of 5,000 to 7,000 words of body text (i.e., excluding references, notes, and appendices). - *Review articles* of 3,000 to 5,000 words of body text. - *Focused commentary and industry perspectives articles* of 500 to 3,000 words of body text. - *Teaching cases* of 3,000 to 5,000 words of body text. For further information on special issues requirements, see http://connexionsjournal.org/special-issues/ Please send your proposal for a Special Issue to Rosário Durão at editor(a)connexionsjournal.org Thank you for considering organizing a Special Issue for connexions • international professional communication journal. Rosário Durão Editor *www.connexionsjournal.org **connexions •** international professi****onal communication journal *(ISSN 2325-6044) *Department of Communication, Liberal Arts, Social Sciences<http://infohost.nmt.edu/~class/> * *New Mexico Tech <http://www.nmt.edu>** ***

1 0

Feminism and Intimacy in Cold, Neoliberal Times
by Radhika Gajjala 27 May '13

27 May '13

http://fem.icahdq.org/ohana/website/?p=84677204 ___ *Feminism and Intimacy in Cold, Neoliberal Times* *June 21st, 2013 (10 am - 6 pm)* Annual Gender Event, Goldsmiths University of London. Departments of Media and Communication, and SociologyChaired by Angela McRobbie, Sara Ahmed, Beverly Skeggs, Sarah KemberFor detailed information, please visit http://www.gold.ac.uk/calendar/?id=6554 This event will bring prominent feminist researchers and two visual artists together to discuss key dynamics within the field of feminist and queer intimacy studies. We will consider, among other things, the possibility of a cultural politics of love, queer resistances in the ‘trans’ forming of clinical and therapeutic practice, class relations in changing worlds of intimacy, the politics of care and compassion, the market for ‘self-esteem’, mother love, family ‘human capital’, and modes of countering the ‘insurgent patriarchy’ of contemporary neoliberalism. We welcome scholars from the US who are able to speak at Goldsmiths, University of London in connection with the Annual ICA Event. All speakers are keynotes, papers will be 25 minutes in length. 10-11.30 Lynn Jamieson (Edinburgh) New Sociologies of Intimacy Sarah Banet-Weiser (USC) Economies of Visibility and the Market for Self-Esteem Lyndsey Moon (Roehampton) Queer Resistances: ‘Trans’ forming Clinical and Therapeutic Practice 11.45-1.15 Priya Kapoor (Portland) Susan Douglas (Michigan) Enlightened Sexism meets Enlightened Ageism Andrea Press (Virginia) Feminism LOL Media Culture in a Post-feminist Age 2.00-3.30 Carol Stabile (Oregon) Magic Vaginas: The End of Men and Working Like a Dog Radhika Gajjala (Bowling Green) Digital Subaltern 2.0 Lisa Henderson (Amherst, Mass) Queers and Class 4.00-5.30 Heidi Hoefinger (NDRI, NY) Sex, Love and Money in Cambodia Kerstin Drechsel (Kassel and Berlin) Heat Storage Systems Mary Whilte (Loughborough) Mummy Work 5.30- 6.30 drinks reception. ALL WELCOME ------------------------------ *May 13, 2013* *2013 Teresa Award Ceremony* The Feminist Scholarship Division is delighted to announce that Karen Ross, professor of Media and Public Communication, and director of postgraduate research in the School of the Arts at the University of Liverpool, is the 2013 recipient of the Teresa Award for the Advancement of Feminist Scholarship. The award will be presented during the ICA conference in London at a ceremony and reception to be held Tuesday, June 18, from 6 to 7:15 p.m. at the Hilton Metropole in Hilton Meeting Rooms 16 and 17. Please join us in celebrating Karen's many accomplishments. Karen was chosen for the award from a very competitive field. Both the quality and quantity of her work are truly exceptional -- in the important questions tackled in her research, whether in the context of gendered political communication, media representation, or activism, as well as in her work to advance women in higher education and media organizations. Her commitment to social change as evidenced by her efforts to create a more equitable, inclusive and just academy, her position as the inaugural editor of *Communication, Culture & Critique*, as well as all of her other work on editorial boards and elsewhere, also speak to her status as an internationally renowned and highly respected feminist scholar who has significantly contributed to the advancement of feminist scholarship. The committee is delighted to be able to present this much deserved award to her. We hope you can join us in honoring Karen! I look forward to seeing those of you who can make it in London! All the best, Marian Meyers (on behalf of the Teresa Award Committee)

1 0