Utopian Media Studies: Research for collective forms of becoming otherwise Website: <https://textaural.com/utopianmediastudies/> PDF version < https://textaural.com/utopianmediastudies/CFP_UtopianMediaStudies_extended.p...
Guest editors: Steve Jankowski (University of Amsterdam, Netherlands) Jakko Kemper (University of Amsterdam, Netherlands) Call for Papers Deadline for Abstract Submissions: March 1, 2025 Deadline for Full Papers: 15 August, 2025 Expected date of publication: March, 2025 There is growing sentiment within new media studies that the work of researchers must not only diagnose current issues around media, but also provide strategies for hope. As a recent issue of the journal Media Theory indicated, critique is not a silver bullet for the concerns of media, as it comes “with its own intellectual and political limitations” (Phelan et al 2024: 3). Nonetheless, critique remains a fundamental and necessary activity to articulate the matters of concern that are the roiling subtext of contemporary life: from surveillance capitalism to data colonisation, from labor exploitation to ecological disaster. Yet how do media studies researchers move with and beyond critique? To what degree is it possible for research to provide meaningful and hopeful perspectives that, at a minimum, enable just forms of coping with the contemporary plurality of crises and sow the seeds of thought and actions that lead to human and non-human flourishing? One answer can be found within the sub-branch of media archaeology that studies “imaginary media.” Over ten years ago, Eric Kluitenberg argued that while critique is necessary, media archaeologists must also learn “how to retain a certain utopian potential for the media” (2011: 55). This insight runs in line with Ernst Bloch’s belief that “philosophy will have conscience of tomorrow, commitment to the future, knowledge of hope, or it will have no more knowledge” (Greenaway 2024: 6). Luckily, it is not necessary to devise a completely new research program for media studies to have consciousness of tomorrow. This call for papers is dedicated to exploring the ways media studies scholars are doing utopian work when they critique, reconstitute and reimagine their research objects – and therefore serves to unite the disparate activities that are happening within the field today. One common approach has been to first deconstruct popular metaphors about new media and then reverse-engineer them. For instance, in the final chapter of Transcoding the Digital (2014), Marianne van den Boomen moves beyond a mere critique of prominent metaphors to discuss what it means to “hack” these metaphors in order to “organize and regulate digital space in different ways, thereby implicating different political orders” (2014: 192). Relatedly, we have seen a flurry of lexicons which stand as sets of ideas that encourage readers to approach media with fresh eyes. Examples of work in this vein are the Internet Policy Review’s “Glossary of decentralised technosocial systems” (Ferrari, 2021), Picard et al.’s Wastiary (2023), Thylstrup et al.’s Uncertain Archives (2021), Braidotti and Hlavajova’s _Posthuman Glossary_ (2018) and its followup More Posthuman Glossary (Braidotti et al. 2022). These works find good company with the recently released _Digital Media Metaphors_ (2024), in which Farkas and Maloney state that scholars often “uncritically adopt or produce metaphorical buzzwords with damaging consequences” (7). In contrast, _Digital Media Metaphors,_ like the other glossaries discussed here, re-emphasises “the need for ongoing collective and critical engagement with the metaphoric construction of our digitally mediated lives” (9). These efforts speak to the need to define, reclaim and mobilise the shifting terms that have been enlisted to imagine ourselves otherwise. There are still other efforts where critique is woven into creation. Here, fables, short stories, scenarios, and road maps work to either take current trajectories and push them to their extremes or create intellectual pathways that present alternate possible futures. Examples in this genre of scholarship have been Donna Haraway’s “The Camille Stories” in _Staying with the Trouble_ (2016), Mark Graham et al.’s _How to Run a City Like Amazon and other Fables_ (2019), Peter Frase’s _Four Futures_ (2016), James Muldoon’s _Platform Socialism_ (2022), and concluding chapters of works like Rosi Braidotti’s _The Posthuman_ (2013) and James Bridle’s _Ways of Being_ (2022) that offer critical speculations. Additionally, there has been an influx of journals dedicated to combining critique with creation, such as _The Journal of Media Art Study and Theory_ which began in 2020 as well as the final issue of _The Journal of Peer Production_ (Antoniadis and O’Neil 2022). In this context, we can also think of design projects like _Feral Atlas_ (Tsing et al. 2021) and the card game _The Oracle of Transfeminist Technologies_ (Varon 2023) that engage in playful and pedagogical practices of future-making. But producing utopian works within media studies is not limited to creative writing, making media art, or discussing grounded speculations about the future of media. It has also been observable in the designing of activist publics. Examples of this are found in the development of forums built to engage citizens with the ideas of data activism (Kazansky and Milan 2021), or manifestos concerning feminist data practice (Cifor et al. 2019), and public service media (Unterberger and Fuchs 2021). Similarly, there is the Amsterdam-based Critical Infrastructure Lab – with its pronounced focus on the co-development of research that moves from a “reactionary” approach to more “proactive” approaches that facilitate the emergence of new technological imaginaries (Ten Oever et al. 2024). In each of these cases, the purpose is to create localised social conditions in which citizens and academics can work together to bring about different visions of our media. Each of these types of research activities – dedicated to creating lexicons for new thought, producing literature and art, as well as designing publics – are as much indebted to critique as they are to creative efforts that establish a groundswell of hopeful activity. In this regard, these activities all speak to Steven Jackson’s suggestion that “it may be the patient nurturing and mutual transmission of hope, rather than the always disappointed search for revolutionary transformation or a historical agent, that forms the central task and challenge of critical scholarship today” (Jackson, 2024: 428). However, it is perhaps because of their heterogeneity that it has been difficult to see them as part of a cohesive and comprehensive way of doing media studies – a situation that was similarly identified in sociology’s latent method of utopia (Levitas 2013). As such, this special issue aims to gather together critiques and reconstitutions of media studies research that are utopian in their goals and practice. ## Special issue topics Submissions may include (but are not limited to) explorations of the following topics: – Media theorists, collectives, and projects that have contributed to media studies’ utopian tradition. – The utopian disciplinary visions of the political economy of communication, feminist media studies, new materialism, cybernetics, the environmental humanities, etc. – Media studies collectives/conferences/working groups dedicated to critiquing and reconstituting digitally mediated societies. – The genres of utopian media studies research such as the manifesto, participatory research with civil society, new media art and design, the speculative or fabulatory final chapter of monographs, policy recommendations reports. – The role of hope, optimism and utopian thinking in the study of technology. – The ways a utopian media studies can avoid the traditional perils, risks and exclusionary mechanisms associated with utopian thinking. – Reflections on how utopian and hopeful thinking can inform, shape and re-orient media studies methodologies. – Distinctions between the planetary and the local when it comes to media utopias. – The question of how utopian traditions can be more structurally integrated into media studies programs and curricula. ## Important dates 1. Abstract submission date: 1 March 2025 2. Acceptance/rejection feedback: 30 April 2025 3. Authors submit full papers: 15 August 2025 4. Peer reviews completed: 15 October 2025 5. Revised papers submitted: 15 December 2025 6. Final acceptance: 15 February 2026 ## Submission Guidelines Please submit an extended abstract of 500 words (including references) that includes the research question, argument, outlines the theoretical framework, and clearly explains the contribution to the special issue theme. The submission will also include the names, titles, and contact information for 2-3 suggested reviewers. We especially welcome submissions from researchers from the Global South. Please email abstracts to utopianmediastudies@gmail.com by 1 March 2025. Accepted abstracts must be original, unpublished works. These will undergo a blind peer-review process following the usual procedures for Convergence. Please take care to follow the submission guidelines of the journal. No payment from the authors will be required. If you have further questions, please contact the guest editors, Steve Jankowski (s.jankowski@uva.nl) and Jakko Kemper (j.kemper@uva.nl). We look forward to receiving your contributions. ## Editors Steve Jankowski is an Assistant Professor in New Media Histories at the department of Media Studies Department (University of Amsterdam) and the principal investigator of the Wikimedia Foundation-funded project, Slow Editing Towards Equity. He has published articles about Wikipedia in journals such as _Internet Histories_ and the _Journal of Peer Production_ and has published in the _De Guyter’s Handbook of Automated Futures_ (2024). He is interested in the intersections between digital culture, interface design, and the imaginaries of democracy and knowledge. Jakko Kemper is Assistant Professor in Digital Aesthetics and Platform Vernaculars at the department of Media Studies (University of Amsterdam). He is the author of the book _Frictionlessness_ (Bloomsbury, 2024), co-editor of the volume Imperfections (Bloomsbury, 2021), and has published work in, among other journals, _Theory, Culture & Society,_ _Media Theory,_ and _Information, Communication & Society._ Currently, his research focuses on the environmental implications of generative AI and on the representation of nature within digital cultures. ## References Antoniadis P and O’Neil M (2022) Editorial notes: Researching transition, transitioning research. *Journal of Peer Production*, 15, http://peerproduction.net/editsuite/issues/issue-15-transition/editorial-not... (accessed 11 November 2024). Boomen M van den (2014) *Transcoding the digital: How metaphors matter in new media.* Institute of Network Cultures. Braidotti R (2013) *The Posthuman.* Polity Press. Braidotti R and Hlavajova M (2018) *Posthuman Glossary.* Bloomsbury Academic. Braidotti R, Jones E and Klumbyte G (2022) *More Posthuman Glossary.* Bloomsbury Academic. Bridle J (2023) *Ways of Being.* Picador. Cifor M, Garcia P, Cowan, TL, Rault J, Sutherland T, Chan A, Rode J, Hoffmann AL, Salehi N, and Nakamura L (2019) *Feminist Data Manifest-No.* https://www.manifestno.com/ (accessed 11 November 2024). Farkas J and Maloney M (2024) *Digital Media Metaphors: A Critical Introduction.* Routledge. Ferrari V (2021) Introducing the glossary of decentralised technosocial systems. *Internet Policy Review,* 10(2). Frase P (2016) *Four futures: Visions of the World After Capitalism.* Verso. Fuchs C and Unterberger K (2021) *The Public Service Media and Public Service Internet Manifesto.* University of Westminster Press. Greenaway J (2024) *A Primer on Utopian Philosophy*. Zero Books. Haraway D (2016) *Staying with the Trouble: Making Kin in the Chthulucene.* Duke University Press. Jackson S (2023) “Ordinary hope.” In: Papadopoulos D, Puig de la Bellacasa M and Tacchetti M (eds) *Ecological Reparation.* Bristol University Press. Kazansky B and Milan S (2021) “Bodies not templates”’: Contesting dominant algorithmic imaginaries. *New Media & Society,* 23(2): 363–381. Kluitenberg E (2011) On the Archaeology of Imaginary Media. In: Huhtamo E and Parikka J (eds) *Media archaeology: Approaches, applications, and implications.* University of California Press, pp. 48–69. Levitas R (2013) *Utopia as Method: The Imaginary Reconstitution of Society.* Palgrave macmillan. Graham M, Kitchin R, Mattern S and Shaw J (2019) *How to Run a City Like Amazon and other Fables.* Meatspace Press. Muldoon J (2022) *Platform Socialism.* Pluto Press. Muliaee M and Mehrvarz M (2020) Mapping media studies: An introduction. *MAST,* 1(1): 2–7. Picard M, Brenchat-Aguilar A, Carroll T, Gilbert J and Miller N (2023) *Wastiary: A Bestiary of Waste.* UCL Press. Ten Oever N, Maxigas, Jansen F, Gorchakova N, Vorndran S, Kuznetsov D and Zhang E (2024) *Critical Infrastructure Lab.* https://www.criticalinfralab.net (accessed 11 November 2024). Tsing AL, Deger J, Saxena AK and Zhou F (2021) *Feral Atlas.* https://feralatlas.org (accessed 11 November 2024). Varon J (2023) On envisioning alternative transfeminist futures. In: Place A (ed) *Feminist Designer: On the Personal and the Political in Design.* MIT Press.