Contributions are particularly welcomed around the three thematic sessions of the preconference:

(1) Mediatization: Are we mediatized?

The notion of mediatization has emerged as one of the central concepts or theoretical frameworks in communication research. Despite its popularity, there remain different definitions and interpretations of the term and its relationship to associated notions, such as mediation, media logic or media society. Papers addressing this theme can examine, for example, different definitions of mediatization, its history and uses, and the question of its usefulness in various research areas. How does mediatization relate to earlier theoretical paradigms in communication studies, such asmedium theory, or other broad terms that highlight the role of media and communication in contemporary society, such as information society or network society? Does mediatization represent a new paradigm for understanding communication and society, or is it just another buzzword? Are we – indeed – mediatized?

(2) Inequality: Are media a cause or a solution to social inequality?

The media, and the internet in particular, have always been associated with both hopes and fears regarding social inequality and exclusion. New media technologies raise hopes of revitalizing democracy and citizen participation, but also concerns over new forms of digital exclusion and concentrations of power. In the past few decades, worries of digital inequality and exclusion have mostly been discussed under the concept of the digital divide. Beyond questions of connectivity and skills, do these debates capture the most essential dimensions of exclusion and inequality? Do alternative terms like media justice, democratization, or communication rightshelp advance understanding of media and social inequality, or is there a need for new terminologies or paradigms? And how do questions of inequality and exclusion figure into current media and communication policies? To what degree media policy should be assessed as a dimension of social policy? Can policy tools, such as public service media, net neutrality or universal access policies, help promoting social justice, and how should such aims be conceptualized?

(3) Normativity and activism: What role for communication academics in society?

Many of the central concepts of communication studies – e.g. the public sphere, democracy, equality, freedom, participation – are inherently normative. Are these underlying ideals universally valid or do they unnecessarily limit the perspectives of communication research? It is easy to argue that researchers should be reflective and open about the concepts they use and assumptions they entail. But is it ever possible to be completely free of normative assumptions?. Should we make a distinction between purely analytical and more activist-oriented research in communication studies? What does it mean to be reflective, normative, or critical in contemporary communication research? And who are researchers accountable to in the end?

We welcome paper proposals that approach the above-mentioned, or closely related, themes from a variety of perspectives. Key concepts and paradigms of communication research can be approached, for example, by tracing their intellectual history, comparing their uses across different languages or research areas, evaluating their usefulness for specific empirical research questions, or by proposing more developed concepts or theoretical frameworks.