Dr Beata Czechowska-Derkacz talks about the importance of communication in society and the situation of media with Prof. Iwona Hofman, Chairman of the Committee on Social Communication and Media Sciences of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Director of the Institute of Social Communication and Media Sciences at Maria Curie Skłodowska University in Lublin.

- This year's conference is Media - Business - Culture. Pomerania 2021 is held under the motto "A decade of media studies". It is now ten years since the establishment of the discipline - the science of social communication and media. The environment of the Polish Society for Social Communication (PTKS), and you personally, professor, were very much involved in the creation of the new discipline. From the perspective of these ten years, can you say that it was worth it?

- If it weren't for my conviction that it was worth it, I probably wouldn't have committed myself, heart and soul, to our discipline. I believe that the study of the media, the processes of social communication, are so advanced in the world that we could no longer wait with formalising media studies in Poland. Before the establishment of the discipline - media studies - (in 2011) research, habilitation and doctoral theses in the field of media were carried out at humanities and social science faculties. The author of such work was always burdened with the tributes, either in terms of the choice of the subject of research, or in terms of methodology, appropriate for the discipline in which he conducted his media studies research. He prepared his work as a guest, as an exception, and for some - even as an intruder.

- I myself am such an example, my doctoral thesis, closely related to media studies, was conducted at the Faculty of Philology. But I was welcomed as a guest...

- So was I. The preparation of my theses, both PhD and habilitation, although closely related to media, was only possible in political science. The basic chapter entitled "Political conditions" determined the approach to the problem. We were reviewed by specialists, experts from completely different fields and scientific disciplines. Dissertations dealing with media genres or systems, for example, were evaluated by lawyers. Working for the establishment of a media discipline was directly the duty of all those who had already had to deal with the organisation of scientific life. So was our experience in the community, confirmed by many conferences. We felt that a powerful group of scholars interested in media and social communication processes was emerging. It also had external conditions. In fact, it was only the first decade of the 21st century that showed the potential of the media. The processes related to mediatisation, new media, which ceased to function as a technological determinant and became a fully-fledged object of research, meant that a place had to be found for such research interests.

- The discipline is developing dynamically, but for a very long time, there were only two centres authorised to grant habilitation in our discipline. Is this a sufficiently expansive path?

- Two centres - the University of Warsaw and the Maria Curie Skłodowska University in Lublin - were fully authorised to confer degrees and titles after the establishment of the discipline of media science, i.e. after 2011. In 2018, as part of the new systematics related to the higher education reform, the discipline changed its name to sciences of social communication and media and additionally included bibliology, information science and sciences of cognition and social communication. The new classification resulted in the fact that in all centres, which had authorisations related to these disciplines, at the same time the authorisations in the new discipline started to function. In this way, the Jagiellonian University, the University of Silesia, the University of Wrocław, the Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań and the Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń obtained full rights. In my opinion, this is a good solution. The discipline is developing very dynamically. When I was preparing the proposal to establish the Committee on Social Communication and Media Studies of the Polish Academy of Sciences, I realised that almost a thousand people in various research and teaching centres in Poland have already chosen this discipline as their main one. This means that we declare ourselves as media studies specialists without fear and anxiety about the possible consequences of the lack of evaluation in this discipline or the lack of classes in this area, with full openness, courage and awareness of separate research culture. It also has to be said that the number of PhDs and post-doctorates has grown very dynamically: in the period after the discipline was established and two centres obtained their authorisations, more than two hundred and twenty people obtained their doctoral and post-doctoral degrees. This shows how fast we are growing and that there was indeed a need to formalise the discipline.

- What are the three biggest achievements in the development of the discipline over these ten years?

- Firstly, the broadening of the paradigm of the discipline. Media studies functioned for several years in a disciplinary dualism, that is, in parallel with the sciences of cognition and social communication; two disciplines in two fields, with identical research subjects and certain interpretative communities. As a community, we have been striving to combine these two integral elements in media studies - media and social communication processes. Our efforts, especially those of the Polish Society for Social Communication, supported by resolutions of faculty councils of all seventeen units which conduct research or teach in this discipline, have resulted in the broadening of the paradigm. The establishment of the Committee on Social Communication and Media Sciences of the Polish Academy of Sciences is also a success. I am very proud of this and I am enormously grateful to my colleagues for their support, for the fact that we were one team, understanding the need for this highest level of formalisation of the discipline. It is worth adding that the resolution of the Presidium of the Polish Academy of Sciences to set up the committee was adopted unanimously. The integration of researchers from the disciplines forming part of the sciences of social communication and the media has also been a success of our milieu, although, of course, after two years it is difficult to make a summary of how far this integration has progressed, to what extent we are sure of our own rationale and distinctiveness, and to what extent we enter into dialogue. There are more and less convinced researchers, more attached to the traditional understanding of bibliology, book science, cognitive science. However, we can see that a common research area and a common research culture are developing.

- What is still to be done?

- I don't know where to start, because there is a lot. During the congresses of the Polish Society for Social Communication, in the summary of the term of office, I present the issues that should be solved in the near future. Still unresolved is the problem of the lack of an independent media studies panel at the National Centre of Science (NCN), where experts representing the discipline of social communication sciences and media would evaluate projects with the understanding of their theoretical and methodological specificity. NCN is the main centre in our discipline, where we can apply for scientific grants, and I think that such a separate panel is indispensable if we are to talk about the effects of social impact, cooperation with the economic and social environment or commercialisation of research results. It is difficult to "break through" with a media studies project if we are evaluated in the same group as lawyers or psychologists. Their research potential, rootedness in empirical research, more visible, direct effects of research are much greater than those resulting from the expansion of soft skills, such as communication. Also in the scoring of media studies journals, although we loudly demanded it, we did not obtain satisfactory results. Journals important to our discipline, recognised and published for many years, still have a basic number of points, and it is not clear why this has happened. We are waiting for the results of further analyses of the parameters and the change in the list of journals and publishers announced by the Ministry for October. This is also very important from the point of view of evaluation, where fewer high-scoring journals mean fewer points for a discipline and determine questions about the advisability of evaluating a low-scoring discipline. The need for research networks, both national and international, must also be taken into account. I look at it from the perspective of my previous experience and knowledge of how and through which research media studies centres legitimised their identity in the period before the establishment of the discipline of media studies. At that time there was a visible specialisation of centres, now we research all subdisciplines in each centre. In the context of the development of the discipline it would be much better if, with respect for individual efforts, inter-university networks were created based on sections, scientific societies, committee task forces, which would integrate researchers dealing with specific problems and make them aware of their strength. Regardless of the interests of individual research centres, it is worth creating structures that will strengthen competitiveness. I observe the first indications of this process, especially in the area of activity of young communicologists in international bodies. They are elected chairpersons of various sections and understand that this international experience of the research community must be transferred downwards.

- Research in the field of social communication science and the media is intertwined with research in political science, sociology, psychology, philosophy and linguistics. Is this interdisciplinarity a strength or a weakness?

- Both. Interdisciplinarity is a strength because science is alive and, as priest Professor Michał Heller says: it is always about increasing the potential of knowledge. We can draw on the experience, theoretical background, and methods of sociologists, cultural scientists, lawyers, economists, philosophers, linguists, and many others. However, the youth of the discipline must be taken into account. We seem to be aware of our identity, but it is risky to succumb to such scholarly flows. To be sure that media is the focus, we need to define the object of research, proportionally dosing useful methodological and theoretical reflections from other disciplines. To increase the potential of knowledge, research "at the interface" is always more interesting, more fruitful, contributes a lot, but for the identity of a discipline, especially a young one, it can be a threat. However, I am sure that the media and social communication research community understands well the opportunities and threats of interdisciplinarity.

- You mentioned the lack of understanding of the importance of conscious communication today. Should researchers be more active in explaining media and social communication processes?

- Media education is developed in many centres, also through the section of the Polish Society of Social Communication, which laid the foundations for the Polish Society for Media Education. It seems to me, however, that we still haven't defined the levels of this education ourselves. It is very often reduced to education through the media. This simplistic vision was accelerated by the pandemic. The most important objective is to develop the habit of conscious media consumption. About ten years ago, there was an initiative to create a profession of media educator, but as a proposal to broaden the catalogue of professions in Poland, it did not find understanding among political decision-makers. We should speak more loudly about the importance of media education and the habits of the recipients, but also media education in the sense of effective communication, distribution of knowledge, communication about science or promotion of science. Today more than ever, attention should be paid to these aspects, not only because of fake news and the distortion of reality in the media but also because of the negative processes of deconstruction of the democratic media model. I am thinking of various factors connected with the free market, so-called clickability, the removal of responsibility for the message and the recognition that classical theories of value mean nothing because information is disposable. Stanisław Lem said that we have lived to see a disposable civilisation. Any stupidity can be disseminated once and nobody comes back to it or corrects it. There is such a flood of information that not only do we not sort it out, but we do not absorb it with understanding. We know how the processes of information transfer take place, and from the self-descriptions of journalists, we conclude that they perceive the sources of the degradation of their profession in, among other things, social consent to the sloppiness of information. The sum of these factors makes media education increasingly important and it would be worth talking about it at every opportunity, especially at conferences, while conducting media studies or popularising their results. It is a social duty of media experts.

- Our conversation cannot lack reference to the current situation of the media. Does it look more pessimistic because of the so-called TVN lex?

- It seems to me that we are heading towards dependent media and a semi-authoritarian media system. It is not only about the so-called TVN lex but also about the issue of taking over the regional media group Polska Press. These are the most important local titles influencing social opinion, with a long tradition and history, which have become a kind of electronic public media. We constantly hear about changes in editorial offices, mass dismissals of editorial teams, the appointment of new people who enjoy the trust of the new owners. For them, these are perhaps justified actions, but media observers are not convinced of clear and pure intentions. It is worth noting how the media are learning that they are no longer part of an independent public sphere. More and more people are working in the media who are solely focused on their careers and are prepared to sacrifice the ethos of the profession for opportunistic ends. One can, of course, try to explain such attitudes by the lack of stability of the journalistic profession and by ordinary human affairs - one has to work somewhere, earn one's living somehow. Doubts arise, however. Journalism will have no qualitative value and will not defend itself as an independent force as long as there are no clear criteria for the profession and no professional stability for journalists. The effects of cost-cutting in editorial offices and the self-employment of journalists are getting worse. As a result, we have to deal with a lack of independence, disregard for ethical principles, susceptibility to various influences - political, PR, verbal aggression, media 'wars' between editorial offices and a lack of professional solidarity. For many years we have been talking about the need to change the press law, which is already so archaic that it is completely out of touch with media reality. I have been observing with concern actions that are intended to limit the sphere of free expression of the media. We can no longer speak of a pluralistic view of reality in the media. Editors, journalists and media consumers no longer respect their right to dissent. This is one of the reasons why it has made it easier for the authorities to deepen social divisions. It seems that if it had not been for the firm statements of American politicians, the concession would not have been granted. In the case of the regional media, no one protested; no force made it clear that the media were being raped. It is a strong word, but an apt one in the context of a democratic, independent and pluralistic media model. What has happened is that we have the media empire of the president of Orlen, as an entity that virtually monopolises the regional media market.

- Our conversation ends very pessimistically, so in conclusion, I will ask about the future of the discipline of social communication sciences and media?

- The discipline of social communication sciences and media is one of the dynamically developing ones and I think that this potential will grow every year, as the factors integrating researchers of the three aforementioned disciplines will come into play. The media provide an attractive research subject. There is growing interest in media studies and communication studies. Many external factors make us aware of the need to know the mechanisms of media and communication, which has been further sensitised by the pandemic. Evaluation and the new principles of scientific policy show how important scientific communication and the distribution of knowledge are. I also think there is a resurgence of classical media studies, and I am delighted to see an increasing number of PhDs and post-doctorates devoted to media culture, ethics and, even more, to media history and language. The young environment and the growing number of doctoral students allow us to look clearly to the future. With optimism and joy, I observe the development of our discipline, expecting also the effects of a kind of paradigm fusion, which we spoke about earlier.

- It only remains for me to thank you for the interview and, on behalf of the Institute of Media, Journalism and Social Communication at the University of Gdańsk, to invite you to the Conference Media-Business-Culture. Pomerania 2021, which will take place on October 14-15 this year, and especially to our debate Decade of Media Research.

- Thank you and, of course, I would also like to invite everyone.

dr Beata Czechowska-Derkacz, Institute of Media, Journalism and Social Communication, University of Gdańsk, PR specialist for promotion of scientific research

Biographical note of Prof. Iwona Hofman

Professor of Humanities, she represents the discipline of social communication and media sciences. From 2016 to 2019 dean of the Faculty of Political Science at Maria Curie Sklodowska University, from October 1, 2019, director of the Institute of Sciences

of Social Communication and Media Sciences and Chair of the Council of the Discipline; Head of the Department of Journalism and the Research Laboratory of the Paris Institute of Literature. Professor at the University of St. Cyril and Methodius in Trnava from 2012 to 2018. She conducts research in the field of journalism and political thought of Polish emigration after 1945, focusing on the output of Jerzy Giedroyc and "Kultura". Her scientific interests also include problems of contemporary journalism, media-political relations and the theory of journalistic genres. Author of 10 monographs, about 150 scientific articles, editor of over 30 monographs, including the prestigious series "Contemporary Media". She holds many honorary and social functions, such as the president of the Polish Society for Social Communication, chairperson of the Council of Societies of Science at the Presidium of the Polish Academy of Sciences, member of the Presidium of the Political Science Committee at the Polish Academy of Sciences. She is a member of the Scientific Excellence Council. She chairs the Committee for Social Communication and Media Studies at the Polish Academy of Sciences, chairs the Chapter of the Leopold Unger Scholarship, the Karol Jakubowicz Award and serves as the secretary of the Committee of the Jerzy Giedroyc Award. In 2010, she was awarded the title Woman of the Year

in the Science category, awarded by the Women's Congress. She has been awarded, among others, the Golden Cross of Merit and the Medal of the Mayor of Lublin. She is a Bene Meritus Terrae Lublinensi laureate.