It started a long while ago. After election statements, an election, and an October 2018 email, it was real: I became part of the ICA executive committee. The onboarding began. I knew the ICA well (having been PolCom program planner and division chair and having served on several committees). But this is different!

Fast forward to June 2024. The world is a different place. Politics have changed, a pandemic has come and (almost) gone, new wars are raging. It was an ‘interesting’ period to be part of the leadership of an international association. One of the first tasks is to be the program planner for the next conference: ‘my’ conference was #ica20 in Australia. We worked on a fantastic program with all divisions and interest groups and an Open Communication theme. Early 2020 we celebrated that the program was done.

The March 2020 transition to the worldwide pandemic was a rollercoaster. We cancelled (postponed!) the physical conference, we invented an online conference in weeks, we fundraised and created an emergency fund for early career scholars. We managed to hold one of the first large scale international online conferences. None of this would have been possible without Laura Sawyer and the HDQ team. It was a herculean effort. 

The ’pandemic president year’ was also interesting; the #ica21 conference was also online. With the EC and HDQ we plotted strategies for regional hubs and hybrid conferences for ICA going forward, to also meet ambitious about inclusion and climate impact. We also continued work on open scholarship. We ramped up efforts on IDEA (Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Accessibility) for ICA. My ‘presidential reception’ was a glass of wine at home and an online presidential address: But it felt powerful still because we were very much an #ICACommunity during this weird time.

The excitement for #ica22 was enormous. It felt like a festival to see colleagues and friends again. We also picked up physical #RunningWithPresidents after two online editions. It was kind of magical. And soon ICA could pick up speed again with exciting new initiatives such regional chapters of the ICA spearheaded by Noshir. And in the past year, a huge amount of work has been completed on a new strategic plan for the association, a process that it has been inspiring to be part of.

All good things come to an end. The ride has been fantastic. I am so happy that I got to be part of the ICA leadership, I learned so much, and met so many fantastic new colleagues. My gratitude is enormous: to Laura and the HDQ team, to the changing members of the EC (Paula Gardner, Terry Flew, Peng Hwa An, Patricia Moy and currently Mary Beth Oliver, Noshir Contractor, Eun-Ju Lee, Silvio Waisbord, and Thomas Hanitszch), to the task forces on open scholarship and open access, to the REACH community, to the resilient early career community, and to Hans Beentjes and ASCoR for their support from the outset. 50 more days and then ‘over-and-out’.

Watch here on YouTube: https://lnkd.in/du3Tbg2

The past year was humbling: Student Hardship fund, going virtual #ica20 and #ica21, IDEA support fund, mentorships, regional hubs. All topics we did not expect to be as prominent.

Working on the observations, I felt indebted to so many inspiring and great colleagues in our and adjacent fields. Being ICA President is a transitory and really a team work job. HUGE thanks to the EC colleagues, ICA headquarters, Laura Sawyer, the Board of Directors, and everyone engaged in committees, divisions, and interest groups. 

The gavel is passed to the fantastic Mary Beth Oliver as President.

Thanks also to all ‘back home’ for the support. 

The ICA and its membership that I have come to know better, has shown viability and resilience, amidst the huge challenges. Despite all, this bodes well for the future.

A short thread: As @icahdq embarks on virtual #ica20, we do so in extraordinary times. 99 days ago we were still set to meet at the #GoldCoast. The entire program was planned and many members were excited about the conference and the destination. On March 6 we, the Executive Committee, took the decision to move the conference online. This was a right and timely call. It put health concerns first and it ensured us just enough time to make the adjustment, create a Hardship fund for the students and early stage researchers in a squeeze, transition to a virtual platform, get guidelines and FAQ’s ready for all the panels, and figure out how to do business meetings, interactive poster sessions, board meetings, plenaries, #opencomm theme sessions etc etc in on online environment. At the same time, we were cognizant of the fact that the actual conference week would take place with some members living in hard hit areas, some juggling double care-taking and work tasks, some finding themselves in need of intellectual exchange after a long lockdown. For some #ica20 will almost seem inappropriate to engage in, for others it will come as needed break from the past weeks. This is how the #WeWillMeetYouWhereYouAre approach emerged.

ICA headquarters and our Executive Director @Laura Sawyer have been nothing short of fabulous in these past weeks. I truly mean it when I say that #ica20 would not have been possible without them. No matter how the actual conference now pans out, we owe them huge credits. Also, thanks to all division and IG leaderships who have also worked very hard to make this possible. It is safe to say that this is not the conference I envisioned being part of planning as ICA President-Elect. But the supportive response from participants and ICA members has been overwhelming and motivating and shown that ICA is more than an academic association, it is also an extended family. As Program Planner and President-Elect, I hope our conference will be a good experience, the best under the circumstances.

Mijn termijn als voorzitter van de Sociaal-Wetenschappelijke Raad van de KNAW en van het SSH (Social Sciences and Humanites) beraad liep 1 januari af. In de komende week volgen de laatste vergaderingen en de overdracht. Tijd voor een korte reflectie.

De afgelopen 3 jaar waren geen rustige jaren. Enerzijds is het SSH-veld in Nederland van ongekende kwaliteit. Het veld doet het goed in onderwijs, onderzoek, impact en is verhoudingsgewijs zeer sterk in bijvoorbeeld ERC beurzen. Anderzijds is het een precaire situatie met veel druk op het systeem, enorme competitie en drukte, en een klimaat waarin de waardering van het veld onvoldoende is.

Drie jaar geleden begon de samenwerking als ‘SSH-beraad’. In navolging op de ERC en NWO breidde het reeds bestaande ‘gammaberaad’ uit en werd het SSH, met de geesteswetenschappen erbij. Het beraad bestaat uit de voorzitters van de twee raden van de KNAW, de voorzitters van de vier landelijke disciplineoverleggen (economie, rechtsgeleerdheid, geesteswetenschappen en maatschappij- en gedragswetenschappen). Hiernaast neemt de directie van NWO-SGW deel aan het beraad als gast. Het beraad wisselt informatie uit over ontwikkelingen in de verschillende gremia en treedt namens het veld op naar buiten toe.

Vanaf het eerste moment is constructief samengewerkt onder het motto ‘samen sterker’. Het is een groot en divers veld maar ook een veld met veel gedeelde belangen. En een veld dat veel kan bijdragen door samen te werken, in het veld zelf, en als SSH-veld met bèta en techniek of (bio)medisch. Deze ‘SSH spirit’ komt terug in onze korte zelfpresentatie: http://www.sectorplan-ssh.nl/nieuws/publicatie-ssh-beraad.

Een aantal dossiers heeft de periode gedomineerd. Ten eerste, onze ambitie om de zelforganisatie in een groot en rijk veld te verbeteren. Dat is zonder meer gelukt en het is plezierig om te zien dat we in 2020 een formeel SSH Platformkunnen lanceren.

Ten tweede speelden ‘de sectorplannen’een grote rol. Met dit instrument zijn we begin 2018 van start gegaan. Mark Bovens (hoogleraar UU en lid van de WRR) heeft voortreffelijk werk verricht als kwartiermaker en opsteller van het domeinbeeld ‘Samen Sterker’ (http://www.sectorplan-ssh.nl/). In dit proces was er goed overleg met het SSH-beraad en meerdere leden werkten actief mee aan de uitwerking van het sectorplan Rechtsgeleerdheid en het thema Digitalisering. Het was voor het eerst dat er voor (een deel van) het SSH-veld een sectorplan werd opgesteld in navolging op de eerste sectorplannen binnen bèta en techniek. Van zowel Rechtsgeleerdheid als van het thema Digitalisering gaan we nog veel zien de komende tijd! Met het oog op de toekomst valt op dat de Strategische Agenda van OCW het sectorplan instrument meer dan 40 keer noemt en het ‘SSH-model’ (met aandacht voor een discipline én voor een thema) krijgt extra aandacht.

In het afgelopen jaar heeft het advies van de commissie Van Rijn veel aandacht gevraagd. De discussie rondom het advies bleef helaas beperkt tot een aantal korte termijn aanbevelingen. Het advies bevat een uitgebreide analyse van een zeer goed Nederlands stelsel dat erg onder druk staat. Voor structurele oplossingen is te weinig aandacht geweest. Veruit de meeste aandacht ging uit naar de korte termijn overheveling van de algemene naar de technische universiteiten en de voorgestelde herverdeling van medisch en SSH naar bèta en techniek binnen de algemene universiteiten.

Door het invoeren van het advies enigszins uit te stellen en met wat verzachtende moties uit de Kamer is de ‘Van Rijn ellende’ iets kleiner dan gevreesd. Maar het blijft raadselachtig waarom een haastige stelselwijzing het antwoord op een korte termijn probleem was. De kwalificatie ‘quick en dirty’ van haar eigen beleid was bij nader inzien verkeerd gekozen erkende de Minister van OCW. Het is geen geheim dat het SSH-veld fel tegen dit beleid was: het was onnodig, gehaast, leidt tot schotten tussen wetenschapsgebieden en doet niets anders dan problemen rondpompen in een overspannen systeem. Tot dezelfde conclusie kwamen grote delen van de academisch gemeenschap, inclusief de VSNU en veel bèta en techniek wetenschappers.

Een klein lichtpuntje uit de ‘Van Rijn ellende’ was misschien dat het gesprek over de waarde van SSH en het belang van interdisciplinair onderzoek voor grote maatschappelijke vraagstukken opeens hoger op de agenda stond. Dat hebben we gemerkt in de vele gesprekken in het najaar van 2019 over het nieuwe missie-gedreven onderzoekbeleid, het ‘toekomstfonds’ van het kabinet en de eerste gedachtenvorming over het beleid dat gevoerd kan worden na de volgende verkiezingen.

Het is een oprechte wens dat 2020 een kantelpunt vormt en dat we voortaan een discussie voeren over inhoud en grote maatschappelijke en wetenschappelijke vraagstukken op basis van een waardering van het gehelewetenschapsveld. Ondanks het beleid van de afgelopen paar jaar, kies ik ervoor om het glas als half vol te zien. Het Nederlandse stelsel kraakt maar het is goed. Het is de opdracht en de verplichting om het sterker te maken. Het SSH-veld en het SSH Platform zullen hierin een centrale rol spelen.

In de komende tijd zal ik daar waar mogelijk en nodig nog een bijdrage hieraan leveren. Ik wil voor de afgelopen periode graag de leden en het bestuur van de SWR bedanken. Ook grote dank aan de KNAW, NWO en OCW voor de samenwerking. Met de VSNU en de rectoren hebben we zeer constructief overleg gehad. De vele gesprekpartners dank ik voor hun open blik, interesse en vaak enthousiasme voor het SSH-veld. In het bijzonder grote dank aan de decaan-leden van het SSH beraad: hier werd echt duidelijk dat ‘samen sterker’ waar is. Ten slotte zeer veel dank aan Mark Bovens voor zijn grote inzet rondom de sectorplannen en aan de secretaris van het SSH-beraad Maartje Aukes. Zonder haar was er de afgelopen periode geen SSH-beraad geweest.

Claes de Vreese

Januari 2020

It is an honor to have been nominated as candidate for the presidency of the International Communication Association (ICA). Our communication field is undergoing tremendous developments: a growing number of students internationally, a new generation of interdisciplinary researchers entering the field, an internationalization of scholarship. The communication ecosystem is changing, and against a backdrop of longstanding qualitative and quantitative approaches, new challenges and opportunities emerge as results of datafication, media hybridity, algorithms, computational methods, and artificial intelligence. And all of this take place in the context of significant societal, economic, cultural, and (geo)political changes. These are truly exciting, and daunting, times to be a communication scholar.

Why did I accept the nomination to run for the ICA leadership? First of all, the ICA has long served as my primary intellectual ‘home’. I presented at an ICA conference in my first year in graduate school and have enthusiastically attended each of the more than 20 conferences since then. It is a great conference, a great community, a great association. Throughout the years, my involvement with ICA has included service to various committees (related to the ICA journals, as chair of the ICA Awards), leadership as a division program planner and chair, and current work as the Editor-in-Chief of Political Communication,a joint journal between the Political Communication divisions of the ICA and the American Political Science Association (APSA). I would be keen to continue working for the ICA community. If elected President of the ICA, I want to contribute to sustaining an organization that will make communication scholars from all corners of the discipline feel welcome and at home.

Second, in an age of information abundance and ongoing discussions about the quality of scholarship, I would like to enable and contribute to a conversation in the ICA about Open Science. This is a broad conversation that I believe we need to have. This in not just about Open Access publishing, but also about sharing instruments, being up front about research ideas, transparent and thoughtful about analyzing our material, and ensuring that, when possible, data and instruments are available for future scholars to learn from and to challenge. We need an open conversation about what the Open Science movement implies for the diverse field of communication research. This conversation should be there to further increase the quality of our research and the transparency of the research process. Quality and transparency will help us to build better communication research with a broader appeal. It is important to stress that I do not believe in a one-size-fits-all answer to this challenge. But how can we develop best practices and share experiences in creating an ‘Open Communication Science’ space for all scholars? These are conversations that we should have as communication scholars, at our home universities, with our funders, and also in the ICA.

Third, I hope to contribute to a stronger institutional voice in ongoing discussions about the role of communication in society. We have an incredibly rich community with expertise on a great variety of topics. ICA’s 32 divisions and interest groups are a testimony to this richness. This expertise should be shared, not just with fellow scholars, but widely. Communication is well poised to play a central role, for example, in current discussions about digitalization, datafication, platforms, and artificial intelligence. Many communication scholars are involved in newly launched initiatives trying to bring for example platforms (like Facebook) and the academic community closer together. Is this an easy task? No. Are the initiatives without problems? No. Should we also pursue other research venues and remain critical about collaboration while being cognizant of our academic role? Absolutely.  But do we need to have these conversations and provide a stronger, institutional voice? Yes. And the ICA should be a prominent one.

At this year’s ICA conference, I was honored to receive the David Swanson career achievement award. This award recognizes support and work for our discipline and acknowledges institution-building. In my research I am particularly thrilled with having had the opportunity to develop an international and comparative research program (with grants from science foundations and the European Research Council) while mentoring many young, international scholars. As a former Director of The Amsterdam School of Communication Research (ASCoR 2005-2013), journal editor (International Journal of Public Opinion Research2011-2014, Political Communication2014-now), active in university leadership, and in science policy-making as Chair of the Dutch Royal Academy of Sciences’ Social Science Council, it meant a lot to me to receive the Swanson Award. At the conference in Prague, I encouraged young researchers to get involved in such activities and help build, create, and improve the environments in which we work. I will do my best to help, advise, and coach anyone who is willing to become involved and take on an office, a committee membership or spearhead a new initiative. Serving is fun and rewarding.

Keeping the ICA open and welcoming, starting a broader conversation about Open Science, and strengthening the voice of communication scholarship in societal discussions are key reasons for me to have accepted the nomination. ICA is thriving, the community is strong, and its membership increasingly international. We have a great foundation and team to build on, to launch into some of the new and pertinent challenges outlined above. It would be an honor and privilege to work with and for the ICA community.

Claes de Vreese

Amsterdam

https://claesdevreese.wordpress.com

T: @claesdevreese

I am truly honoured to have received the David Swanson Career Achievement Award at the 2018 ICA conference in Prague. The award “recognizes distinguished and sustained contributions to the field as planners, editors, and leaders and in roles that require time and energy, innovation, and personal dedication. The award honors David Swanson, one of the founders of Political Communication who gave exemplary service to the ICA Political Communication Division and the APSA Political Communication Section. In his memory, the ICA division presents the award every other year.”  It is an extraordinary feeling to receive an award for work which is sometimes less visible, oftentimes a bit unthankful, but actually extremely gratifying. Serving our community, making institutions stronger, adding to the foundations laid by great predecessors is an honour. I can only encourage (younger) scholars to do the same. That is what makes the political communication community strong and viable. Thank you.