Omar Swartz, Omar.Swartz@ucdenver.edu

I am pleased to announce the publication of the newest book in Troubador Publishing’s series on Communication & Social Justice:

Amos Kiewe, Confronting Anti-Semitism: Seeking an End to Hateful Rhetoric. Troubador Publishing Ltd. pp. 230

From antiquity to the modern era, anti-Semitism has reared its ugly head despite changing times, locations, language and circumstances. For each outburst of anti-Semitism a reason has been forwarded such as religious, economic, social or racial theorizing. Yet, anti-Semitism has remained consistent despite the changing circumstances and causes assigned. This constancy ought to indicate that a profound cause must exist – this is the thesis this author has pursued in writing this book. The conclusion offered here is that the religious accusation, that of killing Christ for Christians and that of seeking to kill Muhammad for Islam, is foundational to anti-Semitism and that all other causes and reasons identified are inherently religiously based.
This thesis is explored by focusing first on the religious context that caused the division between Judaism and Christianity in antiquity. The theoretical grounding offered here is that Christian anti-Semitism was brought on by the co-option of Judaism and the subsequent guilt of such co-option. Similarly, but a lesser degree, Islam has co-opted Judaism and that anti-Semitism is the result of the guilt of such co-option.

The author then analyzes several case studies of anti-Semitism including the role of the Messianic idea in promoting anti-Semitism, the hateful rhetoric of St. Chrysostom, an early Church Father, the persuasive strength of the forged Protocols of the Elder of Zion, the Pariah accusation that Jews bring anti-Semitism on themselves, the 2001 Durban conference as an exemplar of Islamist anti-Semitism, and the consistency of the visualization of anti-Semitism via depictions of the diabolic Jew. The book ends by exploring attempts to end anti-Semitism and the efforts of Vatican II in 1965 to admit the Catholic Church’s responsibility over centuries of anti-Semitism.

Other books in this series include:

Kevin J. Callahan, Demonstration Culture: European Socialism and the Second International, 1889-1914.

Ellen W. Gorsevski, Dangerous Women: The Rhetoric of the Women Nobel Peace Laureates.

Shane Ralston, Pragmatic Environmentalism: Toward a Rhetoric of Eco-Justice.

John Rodden, The Intellectual Species:  Post-Gutenberg Prospects.

Amardo Rodriguez, Revisioning Diversity in Communication Studies.

Toniesha L. Taylor, A Tradition of Her Own: Womanist Sermonic Rhetoric and Social Justice.

Philip C. Wander, Shadow Songs: Reflections on Rhetoric, Culture, & Human Survival.

For those interested in submitting work to the series, please see below:

Communication and Social Justice: Call For Book Manuscripts

Social justice is a powerful political and ideological concept in the 21st century; it has become an increasingly central idea for those trying to gain a fuller understanding of national and international grassroots politics. An implicit assumption of a social justice perspective is that the integrity of any community is violated when some of its members are systematically deprived of their dignity or equality. This assumption often leads to research whose findings are not comfortable for the status quo: governments, institutions, and disciplines. Troubador’s new Communication and Social Justice book series maintains that the relevance of scholarship should be judged by the degree to which scholarship advances social democratic values, and that these values must advance by way of valid research that provides honest critique and redescription of those institutions that promote and reify poverty, hierarchy, and/or social inequality.

Books in our series recognize that concern for underprivileged and underresourced groups is becoming an increasingly important topic about which to theorize and for which to develop interventions. The goal of this series is to explore the theoretical and practical ways that communication scholars can reconceptualize national and international societies so as to enable inclusive and equitable communities to emerge; to seek to construct communities that protect individual freedom while insuring equality and dignity for everyone.

Specifically, this series takes the position that potential contributors are intellectual laborers who view their professional commitments as indistinguishable from their social and political identifications. From varying perspectives, each book published in the series will illustrate the vitality of engaged scholarship and the claim that a scholarship of social justice is not incompatible with more traditional “ivy tower” research. A fundamental assumption of the books is that there is no worthier end for measuring social utility than the abolishment of social injustice.

For information, please contact the series editor:
Omar Swartz, JD, PHD Director, Master of Social Science  University of Colorado Denver Campus Box 127 PO Box 173364 900 Auraria Parkway – MC01 Denver, CO 80217-3364 (303) 556-5660 Omar.Swartz@ucdenver.edu
——————————————————————-_______________________________________________-

Second Biennial Kwame Nkrumah International Conference, September 21-24, 2012, Kwame Nkrumah University of Sicence and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana [Post 320]

Deidre Olsen, deidrelillianolsen@gmail.com
CALL FOR PAPERS (deadline for submissions extended to February 15, 2012)*
2nd Biennial Kwame Nkrumah International Conference (KNIC2), September 21-24, 2012 JOINTLY ORGANIZED BY KWAME NKRUMAH UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY AND KWANTLEN POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY (OF CANADA) VENUE: THE KWAME NKRUMAH UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, KUMASI, GHANA The Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana and Kwantlen Polytechnic University, Vancouver, Canada, invite you to participate in the 2nd Biennial Kwame Nkrumah International Conference at the beautiful campus of the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology in Kumasi, Ghana. THEME: “Africa’s Many Divides and Africa’s Future” “If in the past the Sahara divided us, now it unites us.” Dr. Kwame Nkrumah declared some fifty years ago. Keenly aware of Africa’s many artificial divides, Nkrumah was determined to lead a revolution that would bridge those divides. One way to achieve this goal, Nkrumah proposed, was a continental pan-African government, which would provide the African people the opportunity to pool and marshal their enormous real and potential economic, human and natural resources for the optimal development of their continent. A continental union government, Nkrumah was convinced, would ensure that Africa ended the divisions created by the trilogy of enslavement, colonization and neo-colonization of Africans. Nkrumah was concerned by other divisions as well; those created by time/history, nature and above all those created by Africans themselves, such as ethnic/ racial, and religious discrimination, classism, sexism, ageism, as well as atavistic and backward traditional practices, includi! ng ‘tribalism’ and  patriarchy.  Nkrumah had long predicted that unless Africans formed a political and economic union to address the continent’s acute problems, the raging ‘revolutions’ in the north of the continent, religious, and ethnic strife and civil wars  in other parts of Africa were inevitable. He warned that unless urgent steps were taken to bridge Africa’s divides, Africans would be warring among themselves as their detractors and neo-colonialists hide behind the scene pulling “vicious wires” to cut “each other’s throats.” For him, these upheavals are all masked economic “wars.”  In other words, these wars and unrests are struggles over scarce economic resources and scrambles to control political power.  Religion and “tribalism” are mere fronts for deep-seated grievances over economic deprivation.

Topics to be discussed include, (but not limited to) the following: The Northern Africa-Southern Africa Divide The Linguistic Divide The Class Divide  The Ethnic Divide The Ideological-Political Divide The Gender and Sexuality Divides The Generational Divide The Religious Divides The Rural-Urban Divide The Afro-Pessimism-Afro-Optimism Divide The Continental Africa-Diaspora Africa Divide The Intellectual-Non-intellectual Divide The Elitism-Non-Elitism Divide The Global South-Global North Divide The Cold War Ideological Divide (the Soviet-East-American-West) Divide The Post-Cold War Divide (s) The slaver-raiders/sellers and the enslaved Divide The rhetoric (theory)/action (practice) Divide
Paper Abstract Submission Abstracts of approximately 250 words for papers of 20 minutes duration, and suggestions of panels consisting of 3 panelists each are welcome and should be e-mailed, with a short bio-note (50 words) contact address, and one to three keywords related to the area of research to Dr. Charles Quist-Adade, knic@kwantlen.ca no later than February 15, 2012, final notification of selection to be communicated by March 30, 2012. For More Information, Contact Charles Quist-Adade, PhD Department of Sociology Kwantlen Polytechnic University 12666 72nd Avenue Surrey, British Columbia V3W 2M8, Canada E-mail: charles.quist-adade@kwantlen.ca Telephone: 604.599.3075 Conference website: http://www.kwantlen.ca/knic/

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

Call for Papers

Medien Journal. Zeitschrift für Kommunikationskultur

Vierteljahreszeitschrift der Österreichischen Gesellschaft für Kommunikationswissenschaft

(ÖGK), Jahrgang 2012

BRICS: New challenges in the field of communication

Deadline for submission: 31.1.2012

The global division of power is undergoing rapid transition. Balances are changing, with new dynamics leading to shifts in power. Whereas much of the Western focus has remained on the meetings of the G8 and G20, there has been less recognition that the BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) are already organizing their fourth summit. They represent a driving force behind the emerging markets, becoming an increasingly important geopolitical counterweight to the West. The BRICS states are home to some 40% of the world’s population, and, with their approx. 25% share of world production, have been demonstrating impressive economic growth, despite the global financial crisis. This shift in economic and political power also influences the global media culture. Therefore the time is ripe to extend the focus of communications studies to encompass these important and controversial developments.

Articles submitted to this special issue of Medien Journal should begin with a brief survey of the communications landscape in one or more of the BRICS countries, before dealing in greater detail with selected aspect(s) of relevance to the study of media and communications.

Topics may include:

• Intercultural and transcultural aspects of transboundary communication, cooperation and collaboration, as well as structural gaps and frictions
• Issues relevant within the broader academic fields of international/global communication
• Media development in the BRICS countries, and international relations (including the ’big brother‘ problematique)
• Current media-economic and media-political issues
• Cultural comparison and analysis of themes like the role of the media in society today, cultural change and identity construction
• Transformation and cultural dynamics in the BRICS countries

Criteria for submission:

• Original texts not previously published elsewhere
• Manuscripts submitted to Medien Journal should not be published elsewhere until the peer-review process has been finished
• Papers between 3,000 and 4,500 words (approx. 10–12 pages)
• Submissions must contain an abstract (10 lines) and a brief biographical note on each author (max. 3 lines)
• Text has to be submitted in English – submissions must follow APA style guides
  (see www.apastyle.org).
• Deadline for submission: 31.1.2012

This issue of Medien Journal, the double-blind, peer-reviewed quarterly journal of the Austrian Communication Association (ÖGK), will be published on the occasion of the 20st anniversary of the founding of the transcultural communication division at the Department of Communication, University of Salzburg.

Please send submissions to the editor:

Kurt.Luger@sbg.ac.at

Semester at Sea: Raymond K. Ho, Lifelong learner, detached retina in South Africa, January 25, 2012 [Post 318]

For those who are interested, this is a somewhat lengthy account of what

happened to my eye during the F11 Semester At Sea :

Medex and Travel Insurance :

All of us on board the MV Explorer for the Semester at Sea (SAS) were covered

with up to $100K worth of Medex Travel Insurance paid for by The Institute for

Shipboard Education (ISE). It covers all Medical Emergencies both on ship and

ashore during the 110 days of our Voyage. Most Insurance Companies normally

only deal with the money part : you have to find your own medical services

providers and pay for it yourself, then you file a claim. You will be reimbursed

only if they approve your claim for covered expenses.

Medex operates in a different way : they have local contacts all over the world

and were aware of the Countries we were visiting. So when you have medical

emergency you call them first and Medex will locate and make arrangement

with nearby medical facilities, also guarantee payments to them so that they can

attend to your needs right the way. But Medex only acts as your secondary (or

third) insurance so they will try to get reimbursement from your own primary

insurance and from any other additional travel insurance you might have

purchased for the voyage (like Travel Guard, American Express, etc). While

Medex is great in handling emergencies up front, but after the urgency is over,

seems like another department takes over and you are pretty much on your own

to deal with any follow up visits with doctors and file claim yourself with your

own primary Insurance. That was my own experience with Medex.

In my case :

I noticed a slight blurring of vision in my right eye in late September while we

were in Capetown. As I felt no pain, I thought it was just a temporary condition

and did not pay much attention to it, so I went on field trips to The Cape of

Good Hope and up Table Mountain etc. When my vision got progressively

worse a few days later (we were already at sea), I went down to the Clinic.

I was in good hands :

Heidi immediately diagnosed it as detached retina. Dr Phil was not on duty, so

she checked with the other Filipina Doctor on the ship who concurred it was the

case. While it was not a life threatening situation, detached retina needs to be

treated ASAP or I could go blind, so they called the Captain right the way to

declare Medical Emergency. Medex was notified and the Captain speeded up

the ship and changed course to head for nearest land in case I needed to be taken

off by helicopter. The next day we were within sight of the southern coast of

Madagascar (we had a FAST ship), but Medex decided not to use helicopter

(may be none were available near there?) and so we spend another day and a

half heading for Mauritius. Our ship arrived Port Louis the evening on 10/3, by

that time I could not even see out of that eye at all, it was all black. A Navy

Commander from the US Consulate was waiting at dockside, he was sent by

The States Department to meet our ship to offer assistance. After meeting with

Jill and Dr Phil, he checked my Passport to make sure I have all the necessary

stamps to enter/depart Mauritius, also gave me his cell phone # to call anytime I

needed help while in Mauritius. The Air Ambulance had arrived a few hours

earlier but the flight crew needed the mandatory rest before they could fly again,

so we stayed at the Hotel Link for the night (by the way my bath room in that

Hotel was larger than my cabin on the Explorer). Went to the Airport next

morning, after clearing Immigration and Customs through a special line, we

took a shuttle to the Air Ambulance which was parked at the other end of the

Airport. Their “shuttle” for us was a Porsche Cayenne and the Air Ambulance

was a Citation-II twin-engined Jet with 2 pilots, a nurse and a Doctor. While the

pilots were in white shirts and ties, the medical team were in jump-suits. The

Doctor told me she also work in rescue helicopters, so she would be the one

going down and up the hoist with the litter. The five of us flew for over 6 hours

to Johannesburg in South Africa and the flight Doctor went with me to the

MillPark Hospital where she ordered a late lunch for me while she did all the

paperwork to check me in. (I was told MillPark was like the Johns Hopkins of

South Africa, and Nelson Mandela stayed there when he was ill earlier in the

year.) This was the first time in my life to stay in any Hospital (except when I

was born), so I was not in a position to compare MillPark with others, but the

staffs there were friendly and the food was better than those on the ship. I was

put in the ‘high observation area’ right across from the nurses station, and down

the hall from the waiting lounge for family and visitors with vending machines

including one for ice cream, and they had Häagen-Dazs.

The Ophthalmic Surgeon examined me late that evening to confirm that my

retina was indeed almost completely detached and he scheduled the operation.

He explained to me that I had a large horseshoe shaped tear in my retina where

fluid got behind it and lifted it off. He also told me that he booked me into

MillPark because his office was located there so he could check on me often,

but the surgery will be done at their ‘Eye Center’ in a nearby Hospital. The next

day I was transported by Ambulance to the Garden City Hospital where he and

another Doctor operated on me for almost 2 hour to repair the retina with laser

(that was on Sea Olympic Day). I am not going to bore you with details but I

was told the retina re-attachment operation was like hanging wall paper and

getting the wrinkles out. Back to MillPark after the surgery, everything seemed

well, but the following day I had a massive inflammation and was given a shot

in the eye, then eye drops every 1/2 hour throughout the night. It was under

control the next day. Two days later, I could see lights with no blind spots, and

the Doctor verified that my retina was in place. He was ready to discharge me

but will hold me over the weekend for observation as I will be at sea later. They

had put silicone oil in my eye so that I could fly sooner, but the oil had to stay in

for about 3 months and will need an extra operation later to remove it. As the oil

was not 100% transparent, I could not see through it clearly, so couldn’t tell how

much of my vision had recovered. They could have put air in my eye and I

would then be able to see clearly through air, but I wouldn’t be able to fly for

another 3 weeks until the air had dissipated. So oil was the better choice.

I had brought my Laptop with me but there were no public Internet access at the

Hospital so I was not able to communicate with anybody during that time (I did

not have a cell phone). But as I was not confined to bed, I could walked around

and talked to people, also to the waiting lounge for ice cream. Everyone I talked

with (Staffs, patients and their family) were fascinated by my journey on the

MV Explorer and about SAS, so I was like a semi-celebrity.

I was discharged on Monday, but was not able to get any air ticket from the

Emirates Airline as they required all sort of clearances from Doctors and

Hospital. Then after they got all the paperwork, they had to send it to their own

Head Office (in UAE) for approval. So I was kind of stuck in Johannesburg for

a few more days. Finally I told the travel agent to just book me on another

Airline without telling them about my eye operation. She did and I flew out the

next day, arriving India a day later just in time to get back on our ship, and we

sailed that same evening. Throughout the rest of our voyage, I could not see

clearly with oil in that eye, and without good parallax I could not judge

distances very well. Some of you might have noticed that I sometimes spill

water while trying to fill my water glass at the dining table, and I walked slowly

when going up and down stairs and the gangway.

I left the ship in Vietnam and flew to HongKong to attend my niece’s wedding.

That was almost a month after the surgery and needed a follow up to have my

eye checked as instructed by the South African Surgeon. Medex would have

nothing to do with it as it was no longer an emergency, they just told me to take

care of it myself and then file claim with my own primary insurance.

Fortunately I knew my way around Hong Kong, and with some help, I was able

to secure an appointment with one of the top Ophthalmologist on short notice.

He was not cheap and I had to pay cash, but my eye checked out OK.

I did not have my eye checked at Hilo in Hawaii as we were only there for one

day, and without any assistance from Medex I would not be able to locate any

non-emergency services of Ophthalmologist on Thanksgiving day.

How do I rate Medex :

When I had dinner with Dr Phil later, he said he was also not very happy with

how Medex handled the follow ups in some of his cases. But then when I look

at it objectively, Medex was acting no differently than any other Insurance

Companies : They all wanted you to do your own arrangement for services, pay

for it yourself and submit claim, then they will reimburse you later if they

approve your claim. On the other hand, Medex did provided me with some very

good and valuable assistance in arranging for emergency medical services when

I really needed it, so I can’t really complain about it.

I was told detached retina if treated within 48 hours has a very good chance of

full recovery. But if blood supply is cut off to the retina for too long, it may not

fully recover and I could even go blind. In my case, it was already several days

at seas, way past that “golden 48 hours”. As I couldn’t even see any light with

that eye at all when I left the ship at Mauritius, so I was prepared for the worse.

Later I also learned from others that during those Apartheid years when South

Africa was under International sanctions, it was cut off from the rest of the

modern world, so in order to be self sufficient they had spent lots of money in

research in many areas. As a result, they are quite advanced in some medical

fields as you may recall they did the first heart transplant back in the ’60s. The

MillPark Hospital actually has a Foreign Patients Liaison Office so it is setup to

routinely deal with patients from other Countries. So I was kind of lucky to have

my surgery done there.

While Medex made all the emergency arrangements, my own primary health

insurance (Kaiser Permanente of Northern California) actually picked up all the

major medical expenses including the (must be very expensive) Air Ambulance.

So Medex was off the hook for the big bills, and the ship didn’t even charge me

for the visits to the Clinic. My only out of pocket expenses in Johannesburg

were for ice creams.

I felt absolutely no pain throughout this whole ordeal. A month after I got home,

I had the silicone oil in my eye removed (in Jan 2012). My vision is still a bit

‘wavy’ when I look at vertical straight edges (like door jambs) so looks like there

are some imperfection or ‘wrinkles’ in my retina, but I do have full Peripheral

Vision and can see in full color. While the recovery is not 100%, it is more than

what I expected (as I couldn’t see at all with that eye when I was taken off the

ship in Mauritius), so I can live with that and still consider myself lucky.

Japan-U.S. Communication Association

The US Republican Primaries: Michael H. Prosser, Ph.D. (January 24, 2012) (551,ooo comments since February 23, 2011 [Post 317]

www.michaelprosser.com Jan. 24, 2012 (a disclaimer: I voted in China as an absentee ballot for Barack Obama, and will vote for him again in 2012).

From my perspective, of having lived and taught university courses in China for nearly 10 years, only Jon Huntsman had any sensible views related to China-US relations. It is a pity that he quit his commendable job as ambassador to undertake a nearly impossible run for the presidential nomination, when Mitt Romney had already been running for 6 yeears and has enough funds to keep him going through every primary.

I liked Romney better before all of the very nasty Sujper Pac adds in his favor and against Newt Gingrich and Santorum, and before his nastiness in the most recent Florida debate. On the other hand, both Romney Gingrich who several times has indicated that they will spend their time speaking about Obama, have both descended to the most nasty infighting possible.

Romney’s 2010 tax records and estimated 2011 tax records do show how wealthy individuals with increbibly intelligent tax lawyers pay far less tax returns than ordinary people. Romney has said that he will pay his required taxes, and not a dollar more–suggesting a very different temperament than Warren Buffet, who has said that he will give away more than half of his wealth. While Romney has given 3 Million dollars in charity, far more than Gingrich’s 3%, Romney is a faithrul member of the Morman Chuch which calls upon all of its members to tithe ten percent of their income to the Church. Thus, if he paid 10% of his charitable contributions to the Church, based on a 30 Million dollar income in 2010, that is in keeping with his faith.

Gingrich, following the earlier lead of Sarah Palin, loves to assail the media for asking him entirely fair questions,for example,  when the news of his second wife claiming that Newt asked her for an”open” marriage so that he could continue to have Callista as his mistress, and the amazing standing ovation that he received in the South Carolina state–apparently one with a very hiigh level of evangelical Christians who should be shocked at his actions, is really the height of hubris! It is amazing that Gingrich’s “grandiose” ideas–usually a negative connotation, make it quite clear that he is not emotianally stable, and is so egocentric, that making him the Republican nomineee would as Noonan and Krauthammer’s message to the GOP “You’re losing this thing” entirely likely.

I do think that the Republican front runners (Paul will probably stay in; Santorum will probably have to drop out sooner or later), Romney (boring, now frightened, hesitant and stumbling) and Gingrich (far too arrogant to serve as our president), will self destruct. Both of them have offered so many arguments, totally unsupported by any evidence (Romney–If Obama is President, Iran will have a nuclear bomb. If I am President, Iran will not have a nuclear bomb; Gingrich (I will straighten out the mess in Washington within one year”).

We will see the impact of Obama’s State of the Union speech tonight, in terms of cutting the deficit, tighening the federal government, restoring faith in government, overcoming the housing crisis, creating jobs, and whether the so far mostly “no” Republican congress can cooperate for the good of the American people, or whether their only goal as Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Romney, and Gingrich espouse–the only goal is defeating President Obama.

I am not entirely pleased at Obama’s successes, but he did inherit the most recent devastating recession from the George W. Bush administration, and it is evident that the Washington problems cannot be solved in a single year, and perhaps not for several years. Than Obama now owns the recessionarry problems is correct, but certainly the Republicans have given him precious little help recently in overcoming these problems.

While both Romney and Gingrich harshly criticize Obama’s foreign policies, (Gingrich–”Palestinians are an invented people” Romney “American troops leaving Afghanistan in 2014 and announcing it publically plays into the hands of the enemy” “If Fidel Castro dies, he will go somewhere else,” Gingrich “If Fidel Castro dies he will go down below,” while forgetting to note that Castro gave up power to his brother Raul several years ago) as foreign policy continues from administration to administration, Osama bin Laden has been caputred and killed; Col. Gaddafi has been routed; the Arab Spring that may have been initiated by George W. Bush, has been occurring, and the results may be good or bad. the US and China relations will proceed; the sanctions on Iran will proceed; the US will continue to be an important force, and increasingly so in the Asia/Pacific region. As some commentators acknowledge, campaign statements on foreign policy tend to meet reality once an election occurs–as has happened with Obama’s candidate claim to immediately close the Guantanamo prison. No  president can entirely repudiate the previous administrations’ foreign policy except at great peril.

So, on the second January Florida debate, in personal statements and debates, Romney–”Gingrich left the House as Speaker in disgrace,” Ron Paul’s accurate statement that Gingrich did not leave at his own volition, but he did not have the votes to remain speaker, and Gingrich’s and Romney’s misstatements, and half truths about each other, American policies, and governance, on a personal level, I am hopeful that which ever one wins the Republican nomination, he will continue to self-destruc and President Obama will have a second term where he can try to finish some of the so far unfinished efforts that he has made to create job spending, cut fat out of the federal administration, and reduce the deficit to levels approaching those made by President Clinton toward a balanced budget.        Miichael H. Prosser, Ph.D.

Lily Mendoza, lmendoza421@sbcglobal.net
International and Intercultural Communication Division, National Communication Association, Call for Submissions The International and Intercultural Division invites submissions to the 2012 National Communication Convention in Orlando, Florida. Three kinds of submissions will be considered: individual papers, paper sessions, and panel discussions on international and intercultural communication topics. The theme for the 2012  convention is “Celebrate COMMunity” (see official NCA Convention call) which encourages exploration of ideas and principles that both unite and diversify us as a discipline. Papers, sessions, and panels that explore and develop the convention theme as it relates to communication in cultural or intercultural contexts are strongly encouraged. The deadline for submission of all materials is Wednesday, March 28, 2012 at 11:59 p.m. Pacific Time. All submissions must be made via NCA Submission Central which opens on January 16. Emailed or mailed submissions will not be accepted. For a definition of submission types, please refer to the step-by-step “How to Submit”

Instructions provided in the Convention Library. Following are the guidelines for each submission category: 1. Individual Papers. Individual paper submissions should include a 100-word abstract and are limited to 25 pages of text.  (Appendix, references and tables are not counted in the 25-page limit). Longer papers must be edited to meet the 25-page requirement. Only complete papers will be considered for this category. Individual paper submissions should NOT contain identifying information (author name, university affiliation). We follow a blind review process.  Please indicate whether you want your individual paper submission to be considered as a student paper selection or for the Scholar-to-Scholar sessions. Student papers should be clearly marked as such to be eligible for top student honors in the division, as well as the Donald P. Cushman Award for top student paper in NCA. To be eligible for either award, all authors must be students. Only one paper per author will be accepted, with one additional co-authored paper permitted for the division; if two sole-authored papers a! re submitted, the highest ranking will be accepted. The same paper may not be submitted to more than one division. Submissions should be original work, by the authors named, not previously presented at this or other conferences, and not previously published. 2.  Paper Sessions.  Submissions must include: a) a general description of the  session theme, b) a statement of the rationale, c) titles and abstracts of the individual papers, and d) presenters, a session chair, and a respondent. 3. Panel Discussions: Submissions must include: a) a panel description, b) a rationale outlining the importance of the submission, c) the name and affiliation of each presenter involved, and d) a session chair. Again, all materials must be submitted online through NCA Submission Central. Proposals for short courses, pre-conferences, seminars, or GIFTS (Great Ideas for Teaching Students) should be submitted directly to program planners for those areas. All submissions must list any A/V requirements at the time of submission. Check your email address listed in NCA Submission Central before or after submission as all correspondence goes there. Deadline: Wednesday, March 28, 2012at 11:59 p.m. Pacific Time

Contact: S. Lily Mendoza, Vice Chair of the IIC Division and division organizer for Orlando, Florida, Department of Communication and Journalism, Oakland University, 317 Wilson Hall, Rochester, MI 48309-4401, phone (248) 370-2685, fax (248) 370-4208, email: mendoza@oakland.edu.
_____________________________________________________________________________________

-

Subject: Call for papers: Interdisciplinary and Comparative Approaches to Ethnic Conflict, An International Symposium, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences of Sabanci University, Istanbul, Turkey and the Marie Curie Action “Sustainable Peace Buiding, May 5-6, 2012
Call for papers
The Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences of Sabanci University, Istanbul and the Marie Curie Action “Sustainable Peace Building” funded under the EU’s 7th Framework Programme invite contributions to Interdisciplinary and Comparative Approaches to Ethnic Conflict: An International Symposium on 5-6 May 2012.
This interdisciplinary conference is dedicated to furthering our understanding of the debates around the causes of ethnic violence, the impact of ethnic tensions and violence on different groups, and the challenges of regulating ethnic conflict on both a global and local scale.
We invite papers around a wide range of themes: -Ethnicity, Migration and the Diaspora -Ethnicity, Media and Violence -Ethnicity and Civil War -Ethnicity, Conflict and Religion -Ethnicity, Violence and Gender -Ethnic Conflict, Reconciliation and Democratization -International Regulation of Ethnic Conflict
Submission of Papers:
In the spirit of providing a widely inclusive platform for debate, we invite abstracts for papers adopting a variety of critical approaches to the study of ethnic conflict. However, comparative research analyzing the challenges of accommodation in the Post-Ottoman societies and the successor states are highly welcome. Please send your CV and a 500 word maximum abstract of an unpublished paper by 1 February 2012 to bcelik@sabanciuniv.edu. Successful applicants will be notified by 15 February 2012. Limited funding is available for some participants. Some papers will be selected for submissions to an edited book/journal.

Date and Venue: 5-6 May 2012; Sabanci University Karakoy Communication Center, Bankalar Caddesi No. 2. Karaköy, Karakoy District, European Side, Istanbul.
Organizing committee: Ayşe Betül Çelik, Tessa Diphoorn, Victoria Araj — Ayse Betul Celik Docent Dr./Associate Professor Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences Sabanci University Orhanli Tuzla, Istanbul Turkey 34956 +90 (216) 483 9298

_________________________________________________________________________________

Call for papers

Belgrade, May 30-June 2, 2012

The Serbian Psychological Society’s 60^th annual convention is May 30 – June 2, 2012, in Belgrade, the capital of Serbia. The conference theme is ‘Measurement and Assessment in Psychology.’

This conference features plenary lectures, symposia, round tables, paper/poster presentations, workshops, and book presentations. Invited keynote speakers are Professors Philip Corr, PhD, University of East Anglia, United Kingdom (Anxiety and the Behavioral Inhibition System), Reiner Riemann, PhD, University of Bielefeld, Germany (Advances in the behavior genetic study of personality and ability traits), and Ivan Ivic, PhD, University of Belgrade (Man as animal symbolicum: New insights).

Program and organizing committees invite authors to submit proposals on topics in all areas of psychology for the symposia (maximum of six speakers, up to 90 minutes duration), oral and poster presentations, round-table discussions (duration up to 90 minutes, each participant should have 20-30 minutes for discussion), and for the workshops. Abstracts can be based on empirical research or theoretical/review work. Abstracts should be 300-500 words long, in Serbian or English.

Deadline for on-line submission of abstracts is March 1, 2012 (Guidelines in English at http://dps.org.rs/scientific-professional-meeting/545). All submissions are peer reviewed anonymously. If you have any questions, please email Dr. Ivana Petrovic, APA Division 52 liaison for Serbia, JFDP Fellow at Fordham University (ipetrovi@f.bg.ac.rs).

_________________________________________________________________________________________

Kristin Shamas, KShamas@okcu.edu
New book about Media and Armed Conflict in Colombia:
“Citizens’ Media Against Armed Conflict: Disrupting Violence in Colombia”
Clemencia Rodríguez The University of Minnesota Press 2011
“Clemencia Rodríguez has given us an astonishing ethnographic study of ‘citizens’ media’ in Colombia. Remarkably, and with great insight into what uses of such ‘small media’ can accomplish, she offers readers a glimmer of hope in a stark war-torn social landscape, as well as a welcome and original intervention into contemporary theorizations of media worlds in circumstances of violence.” -Faye Ginsburg, New York University Description
For two years, Clemencia Rodríguez did fieldwork in regions of Colombia where leftist guerillas, right-wing paramilitary groups, the army, and drug traffickers made their presence felt in the lives of unarmed civilians. Here, Rodríguez tells the story of the ways in which people living in the shadow of these armed intruders use community radio, television, video, digital photography, and the Internet to shield their communities from armed violence’s negative impacts.
Citizens’ media are most effective, Rodríguez posits, when they understand communication as performance rather than simply as persuasion or the transmission of information. Grassroots media that are deeply embedded in the communities they serve and responsive to local needs strengthen the ability of community members to productively react to violent incursions. Rodríguez demonstrates how citizens’ media privilege aspects of community life not hijacked by violence, providing people with the tools and the platform to forge lives for themselves and their families that are not entirely colonized by armed conflict and its effects.
Ultimately, Rodríguez shows that unarmed civilian communities that have been cornered by armed conflict can use community media to repair torn social fabrics, reconstruct eroded bonds, reclaim public spaces, resolve conflict, and sow the seeds of peace and stability.