On a break from the conference we bumped into Colonel Sanders:
And that was just about the only break of the bitterly cold day.
The morning started with a “Roundtable Discussion of the 2012 Presidential Election” where the program promised “Panelists will discuss campaign tactics, strategies and outcomes in the general election process of the 2012 U.S. presidential election season.”
Here I was fortunate enough to be invited to sit at a table with immensely talented scholars and talk about the presidential campaign. Even better was that Dr. Larry Powell, my adviser in my master’s program, and a highly influential political pollster, was on the panel. At one point I was looking for a spot to wade in with what I felt was a particularly important point. He said it first, almost word-for-word. That alone would have made my day. But, somewhere around 3 p.m. I entered “What a great day” territory.
I presented awards for the top papers in the political communication division. The Yankee (who was the respondent on this panel) and I won this award last year.
Then I listened in another panel as The Yankee presented our paper “Identity in Twitter’s Hashtag Culture: A Sports Media Consumption Case Study.” Since it got accepted to this conference it was accepted and quickly published in the International Journal of Sport Communication, 5(4). The abstract reads:
This case study, using social identity theory as a framework, examines how sport consumers and producers used different identifiers to engage in conversation during the final games of the 2012 College World Series of baseball. Five major hashtags were noted for each baseball team as primary identifiers; users fit in three main groups and sub-groups. The analysis of tweets revealed five major themes around which the conversations primarily revolved. The study has implications for social identity theory, team identification, as well as broader implications for audience fragmentation and notions of the community of sport.
In the afternoon I was the respondent on a panel full of papers about message framing. The panelists had four interesting papers, one about salience in the New York Times and the Apple Daily in Taiwan in coverage of the Tohoku tsunami, another was about college newspapers framing the H1N1 scare a few years back, another discussed the use of Twitter in the wake of Trayvon Martin’s death and the last one compared how CNN and Al-Jazeera English covered Occupy Oakland.
Respondents wait until the scholar has finished their 12- or 15-minute distillation of their work and then discuss the matters at hand. Different people take different approaches to this. Some try to find a common thread in the collective works and riff on that. Others just ask a question or make a point here or there. I’ve watched people just lecture on about whatever crossed their mind. But when I am presenting a paper I want the respondent to be useful. So I find hard things to critique. I try to ask interesting questions that will help them think of new things they can expand their research. I try to be obnoxiously detailed about it. Be useful.
An interesting thing happened after this panel. All of the researchers lined up to thank me and shake my hand ask me more questions. That’s never happened before. Maybe I did something right.
After that I had a very late lunch, which came all too close to dinner, really. Ordered a burrito at Chipotle, realized how hungry I was and then returned to the conference for the mass communication division’s business meeting, where business was conducted. The Yankee is the secretary of that division and I’m a mostly quiet member. I did second a motion, however.
We had dinner at this place:
Spinelli’s is in a basement. It is long and stone and drywall and linoleum. There are columns keeping the ceiling off your head, and loud speakers keeping the music in your ears. The guy working the counter was an archetype of counterculture straight out of central casting, he said knowing how bizarre that sounds.
This is a pizza place, and so we order Stromboli, which is like a calzone. The menu offered a regular and a large size. I asked about the size and he did the hand gesture: regular, large. The regular looked about like what you’d expect out of a slightly ambitious calzone. When it arrived it looked like a large pizza rolled over onto itself. Just massive. But the brocoli and the spinach and all of the other things inside were delicious. And we sat there for forever laughing about, oh, most everything. About half of the jokes were directed at me, which makes them funnier somehow.
You’d have to be there, I guess. You’d need video and we’ve made a pact that all of that will stay in the private collection.
And since there was no possible way we could still be hungry, but we were all having such a nice time, we found more ice cream.
Here’s one more shot with the Colonel:
Tomorrow: We have three more presentations to take part in. Told you it was a busy conference.
