Hello ARSTM Community,
A reminder that submissions for ARSTM’s panels at the National Communication Association’s 2025 Conference in Denver are due by March 31st at 11:59pm PT (the regular NCA deadline). ARSTM accepts both individual paper and full panel submissions – you can see the full call for papers here: https://www.arstmonline.org/2025/02/19/arstm-nca-2025/
This year Dr. Kari Lundgren, ARSTM’s Public Health Officer, is coordinating a spotlight ARSTM@NCA panel addressing what recent political developments mean for the work of ARSTM scholars. See the end of this email for the call for panelists. If you’re interested in participating in that panel, you can reach out to her directly at: kari.lundgren
Also, a quick note re: the listserv. At the beginning of last week, it was down due to a technical issue. That issue has been resolved, and the listserv is now back up and running. If you submitted something to the listserv early last week, you may want to resend your message.
I look forward to seeing lots of great submissions to ARSTM@NCA this year!
All the best,
Michelle Gibbons (ARSTM president and this year’s ARSTM@NCA planner)
Title: The Rhetoric of Science, Technology, and Medicine in the Midst of Mass Censorship and Disinformation: A Panel Discussion
Panel Description (75 words max):
This panel offers an opportunity for rhetoricians of science, technology, and medicine to reflect on Trump 2.0’s devastating cuts to and disruption of research and higher education while considering what, if any, implications these changes have for how we imagine and conduct our rhetorical scholarship. What are our responsibilities as rhetoricians and academics in the wake of Trump 2.0’s “anti-woke” and “anti-waste” initiatives?
Presenters: TBD
Panel Rationale (500 words max):
In just the first two months of Trump 2.0, the Trump administration has put the higher-education and research communities squarely in the crosshairs of its so-called “anti-woke” and “anti-waste” initiatives. Through direct and indirect censorship, federal officials are blocking studies that mention vaccine hesitancy, disability, gender, race, LGBTQ people, climate change, and more, while simultaneously gutting, through a combination of policy changes and mass layoffs, the National Science Foundation (NSF), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the Department of Education (DoE), and other key federal agencies.
As the editors of British scientific journal Nature state in their February 25, 2025, editorial, “It is hard to put into words the extent of the damage being done to the US research enterprise [by Trump 2.0], which is of almost incalculable value to both the nation itself and the wider world.” The editorial board goes on to ask others in “the global enterprise of education, health, science and engineering” to join them in “denounc[ing] this assault on science.” For Nature’s editorial board, the assault on science includes, as well, Trump 2.0’s assault on diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility initiatives, the eroding of which weakens the quality of research.
In the face of this relentless undermining of research and higher education, what are our responsibilities as rhetoricians of science, technology, and medicine? This panel offers space for rhetoricians to reflect on these dystopic developments while considering what, if any, implications these changes have for how we imagine and conduct our rhetorical scholarship. Should we, like the editors of Nature (and groups like Stand up for Science, etc.), speak out publicly against Trump 2.0? Should we reframe our established critiques of supposed scientific neutrality to emphasize the differences between appropriate skepticism and politically motivated disinformation? Should we organize our campuses—through both internal and external advocacy—to defend our students and colleagues? What about other considerations that researchers make, such as reframing research to be able to continue it uninterrupted?
Participants will consider these and other questions, drawing on their varied experiences and research backgrounds.
NCA proposals are due at the end of March, so the turnaround on this is tight. If you’re interested in being part of this roundtable, please email me, Kari Lundgren, by 3/26. Please briefly explain (i.e., approximately 100-150 words) your interest in participating and how you are currently navigating the roundtable questions/issues. Email: kari.lundgren<mailto:kari.lundgren>
Michelle Gibbons, PhD
Associate Professor of Communication
University of New Hampshire
Horton Social Science Center
20 Academic Way, Durham, NH 03824