AEJMC 2008 Election
David Mindich’s Platform
For so many of us, the AEJMC is more than a mere professional organization; for so many of us, it has helped to shape our lives. My story is not unique: I gave my first academic presentation at an AEJMC conference when, in 1991, Mitchell Stephens asked me to pinch hit for an ill panelist. I made my name in its journals. I got my job through its placement program. I founded Jhistory, an Internet group for journalism historians, after formative discussions over beers in a conference hotel bar. Like you, I made lasting friendships, gained research collaborators, and got to hear the leading intellects in the field. The AEJMC has changed me, as I am sure it has changed you.
It is in this spirit of respect for this organization, and deep gratitude, that I accept the nomination to be its vice president. When we consider the association’s many recent innovations—the JLID program, the international journalism conference, a greater attention to diversity, and last year’s meeting to chart future goals of the AEJMC, to name four— we see an organization that is flowering. And with an effective elected leadership and an extraordinary staff, the role of any future president will need to be a defender of what works as much as an innovator to help us build upon our successes. Changes need to be incremental, modest, and thoughtful.
There are three initiatives that I would propose.
1. A more muscular defense of journalism and free expression
I believe that the AEJMC should not become hijacked by partisanship (many of us, after all, come from a journalistic or communication tradition that avoids taking sides), but we should still be vigilant when the health of journalism and mass communication is concerned. Whether the threats come from congress, the courts, the executive branch, the FCC, or corporations, the AEJMC should be ready and willing to act to defend the First Amendment and a free and vigorous press and media environment.
In 2006, I wrote a resolution, “A motion to object to the Bush administration’s anti-press policies and practices,” which, according to Jennifer McGill, was the first resolution since the Vietnam War to criticize an administration on an umbrella of issues. The resolution, which passed with little opposition, outlined ten areas of concern, including, to name five, the Bush administration’s massive reclassification of documents; its policy of not allowing photographs of coffins of soldiers killed in Iraq to be released; its use of “video news releases”; its use of bribes and payments to columnists and other opinion makers; and its use of the courts to pressure journalists to give up their sources and to punish them for obtaining leaked information.
I am not a political bomb thrower and this was the first motion I have brought to the AEJMC. If you read this motion, you will see that it is careful (the motion included footnotes) and nonpartisan (I gave the document beforehand to a number of highly critical readers who warned me that it should not criticize anti-press speech, only actions, advice I heeded). But I believed (and still do) that the AEJMC needed to defend journalism and mass communication in the face of real threats. Without being partisan or shrill, we should still remain vigilant when the First Amendment and the health of the press are concerned.
2. An examination of student costs
I have lobbied against fee increases for graduate students at the AEJMC and at other organizations. I would appoint a committee to analyze graduate student fees at the organizational and divisional levels and make recommendations. The committee, which would include graduate students, would also explore the affordability of student hotel rooms. Certainly, few would advocate a return to campus conventions and dorm accommodations, but with the graduate student rates at the 2009 Boston conference pegged at $133, it’s time to take a careful look at rates and try to expand cheaper options for our most impecunious graduate students, including those visiting from overseas.
3. A promotion of the convention’s intellectual content
A number of AEJMC presidents have formed committees to examine and improve the quality of our journals; the upshot has been more intellectual diversity and a real attention to quality. We can now productively cast an eye to the intellectual vibrancy of our panels and paper sessions.
AEJMC sessions serve a wide range of goals, from introducing graduate students to the field, to building the curriculum vitae of junior faculty, to the stimulating exchange of intellectual content. It is this third area that offers room for improvement. How can we foster greater informal dialogue during the sessions, the kind of dialogue that promotes intellectual growth? One solution, which I and others championed in the history division, is to showcase the top papers in three-paper sessions, allowing time for discussion (the downside here is slightly fewer papers at the conference, but this is counteracted by the recent rise of poster sessions).
Another solution would be to encourage shorter formal presentations and more back-and-forth with audience members and fellow presenters. The “high density” session, an interactive format with 10 papers showcased, is widely seen as successful; however, the innovations should also be tried with the traditional four-person panels, too. This is something that was tried in the 1980s and 1990s in the History Division’s Intellectual History Interest Group, a committee that once included James W. Carey and Cathy Covert. I inherited this committee and its innovative and informal models in the 1990s and have built upon this tradition in Jhistory panels, which I’ve organized annually since 1995. I believe that we can promote intellectual excitement, and we can do this without limiting the number of papers or compromising quality.
In 2012, the AEJMC will celebrate its centennial. The organization has done a fine job helping many of its 3,500 members to build careers, grow intellectually, and serve students. In return we can use the AEJMC’s first century as a foundation to carefully and attentively build upon its successes.