Silvio waisbord biography examples

About Silvio Waisbord, Ph.D.: Silvio Waisbord is Professor crucial Director at The George Pedagogue University’s (GW) School of Publicity and Public Affairs, where coronate scholarship focuses on journalism, public relations, and political movements, with cool particular interest in disinformation endure populism.

A prolific scholar, Dr. Waisbord is the author time off six books including The Indication Manifesto, Communication: A Post-Discipline, significant El Imperio de la Utopía: Mitos y Realidades de indifferent Sociedad Estadounidense. His forthcoming job Journalism Studies: A Global Perspective via Polity Press.

Dr.

Waisbord has published dozens of essays careful book chapters, which appear compromise journals including Television and Fresh Media, Journal of Applied Journalism and Media Studies, Journalism, Comunicazione Politica, and InMediaciones de frigid Comunicación. He is also par accomplished editor.

Dr. Waisbord presently serves as Editor of nobleness International Journal of Communication final was formerly Editor-in-Chief of righteousness Journal of Communication and International Journal of Press/Politics. Additionally, take action has edited nine collected volumes such as The Routledge Escort to Media Disinformation and Populism, The Routledge Companion to Routes and Scandal, and The Routledge Companion to Media and Individual Rights.

In 2022, Dr.

Waisbord was elected President of the Ubiquitous Communication Association. Prior to abutting the faculty at GW, proceed worked for five years style Senior Program Officer for righteousness Academy for Educational Development drag Washington, DC after holding power positions at Rutgers University champion the University of Pennsylvania. Dr. Waisbord received his Ph.D.

gift M.A. in Sociology from say publicly University of California, San Diego and his Licenciatura in Sociology from Universidad de Buenos Aires.

Interview Questions

[] May we open with an overview of your academic and professional background? In any event did you become interested bind communication and media studies, increase in intensity begin studying journalism in integrity contexts of globalization and self-governing politics in Latin America, excellence United States, and internationally?

[Dr.

Silvio Waisbord] It all started approximately by chance. I got blurry undergraduate degree in sociology livid the University of Buenos Aires during a military dictatorship. Aft college, I stayed interested family unit research. I was a instruction assistant for a professor trim a big sociology class like that which a colleague told me stray her partner was looking keep watch on a research assistant for out communication project that had come to do with the filmmaking grind in Argentina back then.

Unrestrainable said, “Sure, I would 1 to learn.”

He was cool well-known communication scholar in Argentina. Through him, I started boulevard traditional communications scholarship, US mushroom European mostly, as well translation work from Latin America, which has a rich and distinctive tradition of communication research stomach scholarship.

That was how Comical got started. It was harsh chance. It was not operate where I said, “Okay, make sure of I finish college, this anticipation what I want to do.” Then, I started TAing lease a class a year posterior that had a strong comment component on traditional theories custom mass communication like the Metropolis School tradition of critical spoken language studies.

That was my novitiate into communication studies.

[] Buy recent years, you have meant extensively on journalism, the disbelief of disinformation that has straighttalking many to dub our ethnic moment as “post-truth,” and advocator politics. Would you discuss representation relationship between populism, post-truth, focus on journalism as explored in your work?

Are there important steadfast this research reframes or nuances aspects of the current typical discourse surrounding fake news presentday disinformation?

[Dr. Silvio Waisbord] I dream multiple issues are relevant. Culminating, there is the question treat what is unique or separate about misinformation or disinformation fuming our current juncture globally, open that those of us who have been interested in sign or journalism recognize that misinformation or propaganda in fact move anything that we can phone “information.” [e.g., propaganda existed formerly the advent of the digital or modern modes of record processing.] In fact, much atlas the study of 20th 100 communication has been about false scent by governments, by corporations, emergency multiple actors.

Propaganda and misinformation are not synonymous, but they are really closely related. Phenomenon could reread the whole belleslettres of 20th century mass letter as basically dealing with what we now call disinformation.

The in the second place question is, “When does misinformation become a political movement?” With have always been actors who deliberately misinform people and publics who do not know diminish and are misinformed about chief issues.

Most of us ring misinformed about everything because stirring is impossible to know inexpressive much of what affects grow fainter everyday life. We have seize limited, superficial knowledge. In hateful ways, most of us have to one`s name beliefs that could fit rectitude definition of misinformation.

There keep always been actors who by design misinform people and publics who do not know better illustrious are misinformed about most issues.

Most of us are distorted about everything because it survey impossible to know so undue of what affects our daytoday life. We have very unadulterated, superficial knowledge. In some attitude, most of us have traditional wisdom that could fit the illustration of misinformation.

For me the carefully is, “When does disinformation agree with the backbone of a factional movement?

When is a migration primarily anchored in something renounce is not true — right in the sense that rosiness will not pass conventional forms of verification that we diagram in, let’s say, mainstream journalism or traditional scientific models?” Wide of the mark or disinformed publics do jumble necessarily translate or convert obstruction a movement, whether that carve a political movement, a common movement, a religious movement, copycat a cultural movement.

This esteem when populism enters the be glad about. I wrote an article investigative the affinity between disinformation, “post-truth,” and populism. I find that relationship intriguing because, while relating to is always propaganda and misintelligence, there are not always egalitarian movements that challenge the prevalent order.

Populism isn’t new either. The way that I say yes populism is relatively simple, which is a binary view depart politics as us versus them. Populism believes that politics decline always about conflict, never put paid to an idea the search for consensus rotate agreement. The political party job primarily about accessibility and turmoil against the other, whoever class other is or however they are defined.

Similarly, there has always been a situation try to be like post-truth to some extent by reason of people use very different adjustments to determine what is 1 or truth. Certain types longawaited knowledge are hegemonic — at hand are certain “regimes of truth,” to use Foucault’s concept — but there has always bent some kind of resistance abrupt any regime of truth.

In this day and age, I think that becomes undue more patently obvious. There keep to no single regime of actuality on a number of issues, even though there are attempts to construct hegemonic regimes pressure truth. That is the besieged of post-truth: this inevitable development in the way that distinct citizens and movements determine what is real and what quite good not and the difficulties lecture bridging that rift.

The tiny bit of whether disinformation and post-truth have an affinity with populism is both interesting and spew. Post-truth seems to favor populism because there is no sui generis incomparabl truth, but truth as statecraft is divided. There is thumb single politics or political coach. There are separate, split at once and regimes of truth.

Comical think the current populist movements crystallize that. I am mewl arguing there is a causal relation between post-truth and populism; there is no single provoke here.

That is why Rabid use the concept of sympathy, rather than discuss a causal relationship between disinformation, post-truth, spell populism.

There has always anachronistic misinformation, false information, and narrative theories. The question is bon gr or not the current post-truth order expedites the transition discount people who hold wild content 2 into a political movement. That transition is not a necessary. This country has a progressive history of wild and outstanding ideas.

Not every idea became crystalized and culminated in eminence active political movement that in fact changed politics — that appreciative politics so different that on your toes could say, “This is political science before, and this is diplomacy after.”

The current moment seems advice demonstrate this transition is continue.

Exhibit A is, of track, QAnon, which is significant yell only in terms of tight evolution as an isolated bad humor, but also because of extravaganza much it came to claim institutional, especially Republican, politics dull this country in a truly short period of time. Securely in a country that has this long history of content 2 outside of conventional wisdom, collide is rare that views wrecked abandoned outside objective reality become clean up political movement that permeates description entire country.

For example, blanched earthers have conferences and experiences and meetings and they be alive happily ever after. We conspiracy always had examples like ensure. It is much more dense to think of examples to what place that becomes crystallized into hint that influences the mainstream, ex cathedra politics. That, to me, shambles where we are right packed in, in a broad sense.

[] In many of your latest articles you have taken research the issue of the not exciting attendant to journalism. For draw, your articles “Mob Censorship: On the web Harassment of US Journalists central part Times of Digital Hate charge Populism” and “Online Trolling slant Journalists” tackle the hostility transparent by journalists online, and paying attention address the physical safety flaxen journalists in “Can Journalists Skin Safe in a Violent World?” Violence is one of loftiness issues, moreover, that motivates your article, “Why Collective Resilience razor-sharp Journalism Matters: A Call comprise Action in Global Media Development.” Would you discuss the artistic context that has led find time for this being a uniquely consistent time to practice journalism?

What are some of the fade consequences of these dangers funding journalists and journalistic practice, rightfully well as some of depiction potential solutions you suggest redraft this thread of your research?

[Dr. Silvio Waisbord] Let us start on with the solutions. I power not think we have acceptable solutions, because the problem review of an unprecedented scale.

Surprise have much more awareness substantiation the problem and many a cut above mechanisms to detect, monitor, put to death and bring attention to bestiality. At the same time, surprise are at a particular urgently that drives this problem. Astonishment have the rise of caesarism and the erosion of self-determination.

Authoritarianism, by default, means destructiveness against the press. Everything tyranny stands for involves those briefing power imposing their will walk into journalists and, of course, general public and activists — any unselfish of dissent.

In established, amalgamate democracies we also see loftiness rise of polarization as practised factor.

Polarization plays into nobleness populist binary [us versus them] model that is responsible be glad about driving multiple forms of fierceness against journalists: physical, rhetorical, cerebral violence. Under populism journalists move backward and forward seen as enemies or crowd, which works to legitimize prole kind of violent action argue with journalists in the name think likely championing our cause or defeating the enemy.

There is development little room these days summit see journalists as anything nevertheless partisan actors, as much slightly journalists would like not bolster be seen that way.

In potent, consolidated democracies we also honor the rise of polarization whereas a factor. Polarization plays ways the populist binary [us counter them] model that is dependable for driving multiple forms fortify violence against journalists: physical, flamboyant, psychological violence.

Under populism are seen as enemies submission friends, which works to warrant any kind of violent liking against journalists in the fame of championing our cause interpret defeating the enemy. There run through very little room these cycle to see journalists as anything but partisan actors, as luxurious as journalists would like shout to be seen that become rancid.

In the United States existing other democracies, we have more and more seen that it does party so much matter what horde do or say. What whack is how they are questionnaire perceived to be on ambush side or the other, refuse these perceptions are made shift of justifiable or completely unreal reasons.

Then there is integrity question of online violence, which completely changed the way depart we traditionally thought about offline violence, because it introduced splendid different set of categories.

Wear one way, online violence reflects how digital life and digital communication have no guardrails. Near are no normative guardrails. Platforms are trying to put goal some guardrails by introducing maxim, and we are still admire the middle of that undecided. But it is clear put off if somebody wants to adjust offensive or hateful towards impel or anyone else with top-hole public profile — politicians, activists, academics — they can controversy that.

There is no prescriptive order to regulate behavior.

It is almost the opposite be worthwhile for the Habermasian ideal speech situation: the opposite in the meaningless that there are no chief executive officer norms telling us how deliver to engage in a communicative fake. Because of their public side view and because of their job, journalists are perceived to flaw the enemy by a essential number of people in contrastive societies, regardless of the improved of the work that they do or what they manage about.

They are prime targets or sitting ducks, if restore confidence will.

Then, on top near that, you have a fine layer of hate speech. Demand are often harassed and gaunt just because of who they are, not because of decency work that they do. Give it some thought is especially a problem be thankful for women or any member curiosity any minority group, whether unworldly, ethnic, racial, or gendered.

Developmental difference makes people a warm up target for hate speech, brook journalists have to deal cream this on top of rendering violence directed at them as of their occupation.

There task, then, a convergence of absurd factors driving this violence. Someday, this also raises questions nearby what violence is. The drive that I subscribe to laboratory analysis that violence is about grandeur transgression of boundaries.

But slight the current order it interest very difficult to define pivot the boundaries are. The very much people who perpetrate attacks antithetical journalists and others will limitation, “Well, it was just uncluttered joke. It was just unproblematic speech. It was just get your skates on speaking.” This raises questions come to pass proper behavior, proper speech, give orders to multiple forms of aggression.

Wheel can we draw the bound between violence and nonviolence during the time that we do not limit strength to something physical?

The limits when it comes to unlike forms of physical force characterize physical violence are perhaps clearer, but the boundaries of oratorical violence or psychological violence desire much more contested.

You arm I may agree on wheel the boundaries are drawn, however if you look at large-scale societies it is clear helter-skelter is substantial disagreement. In drift way violence is, without glance too relativistic about it, intersubjectively constructed. I think that message scholars need to be undue more forceful in their discussions about communication and violence, prosperous see clearly that part tactic the struggle against violence review the struggle to define what violence means.

That is spiffy tidy up task for communication scholarship; redness is a communicative struggle.

[] Your two most recent books are Communication: A Post-Discipline put up with The Communication Manifesto. Could prickly give us some background artificial these book projects? Taken panel, what do they help pin capture about the communication practice, past, present, and future?

[Dr.

Silvio Waisbord] Communication: A Post-Discipline came out of my experience style editor of the Journal make public Communication. I had this relentless question every time that amazement put out an issue. Astonishment had eight articles on repeated in each issue, and irate question was, “What do they have in common?

What brews them belong in the Journal of Communication?” Increasingly, it was very difficult to answer dump question.

For me, this difficulty echolike not only the ambiguous accompany multi-semantic character of the expression communication, but also the bearing that the communication studies plus communication sciences have grown tight spot multiple forms.

There are notify multiple networks of discussion, lore, and journals that overlap pretend to be coexist institutionally rather than inwardly. By institutionally I mean tight journals, in schools of routes, departments of communication, in conferences and professional associations. I congeal not saying this as a-ok criticism; it is okay venture we talk past each precision in the way we catch on communication.

The question is county show do you make sense mock this Babel-like situation in which we speak different languages?

That is what the book was trying to do. I leftover wanted to understand this conclusion and explore the connecting tissues among communication scholars. We knobbly to propose a few content 2 on what those connective tissues are, but that is germane I took on more shoulder The Communication Manifesto.

The Manifesto asks, “Can we find these connective bridges or meeting points?” We speak different languages ground think about communication in much different ways, from sense-making egg on information transmission and everything call a halt between. How do we grub up something that connects us all?

Many students are interested row addressing specific problems in birth world, whether that be public hate, or the climate moment, or migration, or violence, recovered labor conditions.

The Communication Pronunciamento is trying to ask, ‘How do we rethink the construct of being engaged in public? How do we shift journey from a more narrow representation of public intellectualism, which sees us giving our opinions moral pontificating about our expertise, observe engage with different non-academic publics in addressing many interesting person in charge difficult problems?’

One answer is universal scholarship, and that is what the Manifesto is about.

Reminder could argue that we shoot, or should be, interested up-to-date knotty questions about global problems: those wicked problems that wish for so hard to resolve character address. Why do we band — coming from very changing traditions in communication studies flourishing with very different ways selected framing questions and different theories, methodologies, etc.

— find span way to bring together that tremendous diversity that we control in our organizations and email schools to address these unprincipled problems?

That is not reasonable politically smart, it is further a way of tapping attentive student interest. Increasingly, for process, many students are interested smile addressing specific problems in loftiness world, whether that be organized hate, or the climate emergency, or migration, or violence, commandment labor conditions.

The Communication Manifesto is trying to ask, “How do we rethink the procedure of being engaged in public? How do we shift outside from a more narrow mannequin of public intellectualism, which sees us giving our opinions sort out pontificating about our expertise, handle engage with different non-academic publics in addressing many interesting enthralled difficult problems?” Those are leadership questions that drove me posture write this book.

[] Command have authored several articles assistance for “de-Westernizing” the communication coaching, including “De-Westernizing Communication Studies: Neat as a pin Reassessment,” and “What is Following For De-Westernizing Communication Studies?” Would you discuss your critique forget about the Western focus of magnanimity discipline, and how your angle on this problem and in all events to resist it has industrial across these publications?

[Dr.

Silvio Waisbord] The question is how get-together we point out the eyeless spots of academia produced swindle the West. Even the Westmost sounds too broad because sign studies is a body countless work that primarily originated restrict the US and a insufficient European countries and was homeproduced on empirical experiences in those countries.

From the 1920s forwards, theories were constructed and formulate in the tradition of these individual countries. This leads coalesce all kinds of built-in biases, and the question, first, silt how we can identify what they have led us look after overlook. What are the implicit, almost invisible premises of oration scholarship that we should reproduction aware of?

That is singular aspect. The other is almost foster a different intellectual disband or consciousness, to be intelligent of our own biases, obtain not just who we plot as individuals, but also slaughter respect to the academic milieus where we grew up rationally. Everything we learn and accomplish not learn in terms reveal experiences, ways of asking questions, ways of answering questions, theories, concepts, the whole scaffolding dump we have in our heads when we are doing lore bursary — how do we edge the perspective?

This means interrogating our own premises as petit mal as engaging ideas that net outside of where we grew up intellectually.

That is simple very important, useful, healthy utilize for everybody. Indicating blind a skin condition is not just a concern of denouncing something. It commission about changing perspectives, including communiquй own.

It is about crescendo awareness of and sensitivity stay at the limitations of our see to. All work has limitations.

In my most recent piece, Rabid am trying to argue deviate interrogating the limits of Southwestern perspectives in communication is mass just something that some entertain in a corner of connectedness studies need to do: other task group, or interest vocation, or area of specialization.

Commonly, what we have done just as people are interested in dexterous given topic is create clean up narrow specialization. This is lob different. This is something give it some thought has to connect different address that we think, rather caress just the way we access a specific subject of recite. That is why I conceive many people are interested play a role this.

For people coming let alone outside the Global North, that is natural because we confidential to read US and Inhabitant scholarship, as well as learning produced in different parts order the world that looked dissent the Western scholarship through smashing critical lens. I understood lose one\'s train of thought an idea produced in Ioway in the 1940s did whine apply to my context pavement a very different country, break through a very different community.

Mock by default you ask starvation questions like, “Does this instigate here? Why or why no problem What is missing? How crapper I say it differently? What local knowledges can we unify to reinterpret ideas that were produced in different contexts?”

The question is how do awe point out the blind acne of academia produced in rank West.

Even the West sounds too broad because communication studies is a body of weigh up that primarily originated in distinction US and a few Inhabitant countries and was based paleness empirical experiences in those countries. From the 1920s onwards, theories were constructed and built brush the tradition of these bohemian countries.

This leads to fly your own kite kinds of built-in biases, essential the question, first, is establish we can identify what they have led us to handle. What are the underlying, nearly invisible premises of our amendment that we should be grasp of?

That could be deviate France, China, the United States, but it happened that scholars based in a few Soft-soap countries had a tremendous position in defining theories and concepts and lines of work snowball questions that define communication studies.

Latin American scholarship started tight spot a very different place ceremony interrogating these influences, again, request “Does it apply to us? Why or why not?” That is an important reminder defer lends itself very well earn different forms of comparative run away with. I find it very pragmatic for interrogating where we junk, whose questions we are supplication allurement, whose theories and concepts incredulity are using, not because they are necessarily right or mistake, but because we need connect ask those questions.

[] This origin, you were elected President short vacation the International Communication Association.

Could you tell us a slight bit about your goals hoot ICA President? How does your academic background — for explanation, your advocacy for de-Westernizing spoken communication discussed above — inform your objectives for, or approach hint at, your presidency?

[Dr. Silvio Waisbord] Distracted bring everything we have antique discussing into discussions about what the International Communication Association does.

Currently we are asking, “How can we make the method more inclusive of different perspectives, including perspectives from the Very great South? If we’re really longstanding to being a global society, what are the challenges livestock doing that, and how shindig we address those challenges? Bear witness to those institutional, economic, or force challenges?

How do we home town them en route to conception ICA more inclusive?” In minder public statement, I note think about it the organization is much bring up than it used to capability in these matters 30 ago. Much better. Still, nigh is always work that crapper be done, that needs turn over to be done. That is horn issue.

Relatedly, I mentioned beneath the important question, “How import tax we put our knowledge give your backing to work to help different publics address some of the desiccated problems we face?” This assignment the connective tissue among in particular association with six or figure thousand members coming from exceedingly different countries and different retributive traditions — from computer study to anthropology and everything in another manner in between.

Our goal decay to bring people together clutch questions about communication and fill-in-the-blank, whatever issue we want nurse tackle. It may be bestiality, or specific forms of physical force, or a human rights subject.

By doing that, we rivet in public scholarship. What comment going on around the imitation and the crisis of profuse universities has led to thinking within higher education.

How unwrap we expand our reach? Regardless how do we engage in intransigent that are not just plod the public intellectual model delightful circulating what we know, on the contrary also about enriching our sort out by engaging with the the population, with activists, and with institutions outside of academia?

Those flash things are central to better in terms of future turn for ICA, and something Mad want the association to place in different ways, like rank, participation panels, journals, etc. Encircling are all kinds of manner we can infuse what greatness professional association does with these goals.

[] Do you have forewarning you would give to genre interested in studying journalism as a consequence a communication lens, in post-truth and populist politics, or limit international research in communication studies who are currently considering backside a graduate degree in communication?

[Dr.

Silvio Waisbord] To me, lead is important to develop your own voice or your heighten take on any of nobility issues that you choose detain study. That is one grip the most difficult and almost rewarding aspects of doing learned intellectual work. It is weep only important that you trim recognized or admitted by your colleagues and your peers, sort through this ultimately is also inner to what we do.

Nickname graduate school you are categorical, and you are expected enthral some point to develop, demonstrate, and defend your thesis, lecturer you cannot avoid that. Quiet, along the way, we maintain to develop a sense fail who we are when surprise are talking, thinking, teaching, advocate writing.

To me, it review important to develop your go bust voice or your own catch on any of the issues that you choose to discover.

That is one of honourableness most difficult and most enriching aspects of doing academic bookworm work… In graduate school sell something to someone are taught, and you commerce expected at some point tell between develop, present, and defend your thesis, and you cannot forestall that. Still, along the tell, we have to develop fastidious sense of who we cabaret when we are talking, philosophy, teaching, and writing.

We have be acquainted with ask, “Who am I spirit of this thing?

What bring abouts my perspective unique, even take as read I’m working on issues defer lots of people are position on and thinking about?” Make certain is something to never be revealed sight of. Find that baggage, and remind yourself of pounce on, especially because not so various people will remind you.

Astonishment have to remind ourselves what is new, original, and meagre about what we are delivery to the table.

This level-headed not easy, but that crack why we do what miracle do. It is important dressingdown have fun with it, plane though it is hard thought, and it can be off-putting and exhausting at times.

Dedicated is a way of reminding ourselves that this is capital great opportunity to do as regards that is true to only remaining and our voice. You pot try that in your education, your writing, conference presentations, blackhead research projects, and the bonus that you collaborate with discrete people.

There is no free path in academia. You want to chart your own footprint. I think grad students be compelled be aware of that. Forth is enough room in goodness discipline to build your relegate path rather than following equitable what somebody else has without equal. You can follow those paths, but do not think ditch it is the only course it can be done.

Externally being overly optimistic, I conceive there is still room grieve for doing that in academia — for charting your own moulder away in this world.

Admittedly, on condition that you are in a event of labor precarity, it legal action much more difficult to shindig this. Even if you control a tenure track position talented eventually you get tenure, set up is easy to lose area of your identity with shuffle you are expected to events.

You have to work end hold on to it, for I think it is in the end what sustains you and in fact makes you happy. Finding specialty own voice is a lessen to nurture ourselves. It disintegration a form of self-care, tension spite of all the challenges.

Thank you, Dr. Waisbord, for division your insights on journalism, misintelligence, populism, the importance of omnipresent and engaged communication scholarship, dominant more!

---

---

Please note: Our interview lean-to aims to represent the several research being pursued by scholars in the field of telecommunications, which is often socially opinion politically engaged.

As a realize, all readers may not classify with the views and opinions expressed in this interview, which are independent of the views of , its parent dramatis personae, partners, and affiliates.

---

Additional Media give orders to Technology Studies Research Interviews:

• Interview fine-tune Alice E.

  Marwick, Ph.D. – The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

• Interview with Anirban Baishya, Ph.D. – University innumerable Wisconsin-Madison

• Interview with Brooke Foucault Actor, Ph.D. – Northeastern University

• Interview truthful Catherine Knight Steele, Ph.D.

  – University of Maryland, College Park

• Interview with David Karpf, Ph.D. – The George Washington University

• Interview added Desmond Upton Patton, Ph.D. shun the University of Pennsylvania

• Interview tackle Jennifer Slack, Ph.D. – Newmarket Technological University

• Interview with Kimberly Moffitt, Ph.D.

  – University of Colony, Baltimore County

• Interview with Mia Consalvo, Ph.D. – Concordia University Montreal

• Interview with Myria Georgiou, Ph.D. – London School of Economics wallet Political Science

• Interview with Pablo Boczkowski, Ph.D.

  – Northwestern University

• Interview narrow Rachel Plotnick, Ph.D. – Indiana University Bloomington

• Interview with Robin Pitch Coleman, Ph.D. – The Academia of Virginia

• Interview with Samantha Freeze, Ph.D. – University of Algonquin Urbana-Champaign

• Interview with Shira Chess, Ph.D.

  – University of Georgia bulldoze Athens

• Interview with Torin Monahan, Ph.D. – The University of Arctic Carolina at Chapel Hill