De-centering the whiteness of applied communication research: some editorial strategies

Resistance is its own reward. (Trask, 1999)

Whiteness, the hegemonic assertion of the values of white culture as universal, has historically shaped the colonial processes of knowledge reproduction. This has been the case in communication studies, with the roots of the discipline firmly rooted in the Cold War logics of U.S. imperial aspirations. The whiteness of applied communication scholarship has been shaped by the broad questions of what constitutes applied, and what are the definitional parameters of communication scholarship. The ongoing work of decolonizing applied communication scholarship therefore has to begin by de-centering the norms that make up scholarship.

I am humbled to witness the ongoing and collaborative work of gender diverse, diversely abled, BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color) scholars at diverse intersections in building this space in the Journal of Applied Communication Research (JACR). This is collective work, one that draws upon the labor of many to sustain the processes of transformation.

The editorial board of a journal can be a good starting point for de-centering the disciplinary conventions. We have an editorial board that is made up of diverse scholars, including a number of scholars from the Global South. At the same time, in the past two years, I have become aware of the work it will take for us to continue this process of de-centering U.S./Euro-centric hegemony by turning to the practices of deep reflexivity.

Reflecting on the necessary habits for decolonizing work amidst the pandemic, the renowned Māori decolonizing theorist Linda Tuhiwai Smith (2020) writes, ‘In the strange ways that colonialism works, however, we constantly find ourselves living inside someone else’s story’ (p. 365). As she urges us, ‘Our people have been here before. This is a story we know because we lived it before, we died from it, we survived it and we are here,’ we have to continually ask ourselves what then is it going to take for us to start re-connecting with the stories of our survival? As the planet grapples with the destructive effects of whiteness, capitalism, and colonialism, we have to ask, how can we build and teach the tools and resources necessary for us to thrive in stories that belong to us? How can we learn from stories to weave together just and habitable futures collectively?

Reflexivity as a decolonizing resource can support our journey in continually interrogating the frameworks that define the scope of what makes up knowledge. For instance, if we draw upon the parameter of publication in our mainstream disciplinary journals to select editorial board members, we create a system of representation that continues to erase BIPOC scholars at the margins and scholars from the Global South. How then are we going to draw upon diverse Indigenous and diverse local cultural traditions to invert fundamentally how we come to see and consider scholarship? I am humbled to be guided by BIPOC colleagues immersed in struggles for justice in co-creating the editorial board. The participation of Indigenous intellectuals and activists on the board has strengthened the registers for carrying out decolonizing work through the articulation of theory as emergent from praxis.

I am grateful to the work that is borne by diverse scholars in creating a decolonizing register. Particularly salient is the labor of many early career researchers (ECRs) who have agitated in the past two years against the whiteness of Communication Studies by placing their bodies on the line, and who continue to bear disproportionate burden of the labor of reviewing. The recognition of diverse labor, particularly the labor performed by diverse academics at the margins of the discipline, therefore suggests that the criteria for what qualifies someone to sit on the editorial board have to be undone and rebuilt. I am humbled therefore to have the presence of ECRs and mid-career scholars on the editorial board. I acknowledge the labor of Associate Editor Dr Mahuya Pal in offering the register for collective reflexivity, and in participating in ongoing dialogues on decolonizing the infrastructures of JACR.

Representation is a necessary but not sufficient anchor for the process of transformation. Of the 76 editorial board members, at least 49 (64%) are non-white (of which at least 3 are Latinx, 8 are Black, 38 are Asian, and 2 are Indigenous). In terms of their place-based institutional homes, 57 editorial board members are U.S.-based (75%), 8 are based across Asia, 9 are based in Oceania, one is based in South Africa, and one is based in Europe. More work is needed here in building the representations in the journal from Latin America and Africa. Moreover, 48 editorial board members are women (63%) and at least 2 are gender nonbinary. This diversity of the editorial board has been vital to supporting the ongoing transformation of the journal. For instance, among the 37 articles that were published in JACR in 2021 (Volume 49), 15 of the first authors are non-white (41%), 31 are women (84%), and 5 (14%) are based at non-US universities. I acknowledge the limits to reflecting the diversity of representation in the journal because of the categories that are deployed to measure diversity, and the ways in which these data are gathered (or not gathered) on the submission platform. One observation that is salient is that more work is needed in building infrastructures for applied communication knowledge emergent from the Global South.

In a follow-up editorial, I will reflect upon practices of decolonizing JACR, the challenges to decolonization, and the potential anchors for continuing the conversation. I would love to hear your ideas on how we continue to carry on the work of transformation.

He Waka Eke Noa (Māori whakataukī or proverb, meaning, we are all in this journey together).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Mohan J. Dutta