[Commlist] Call for Papers for the international colloque «After the crisis, the media and the “return to normality”»

Please find below all the necessary information regarding the Call for 
Papers for the international colloque /«After the crisis, the media and 
the “return to normality” »/, co-organized by IFP/CARISM of 
Paris-Panthéon-Assas University and Panteion University of 
Athens. Crisis is omnipresent in contemporary history: economic, 
political, health, environmental... But what about the “return to 
normality”? Who decides when a crisis is over? Which media discourses 
and practices influence this transition?

This Call for Papers aims to explore the discourses, practices and 
dynamics of transition surrounding the end of crises, from a media 
studies perspective. It seeks to examine the role and practices of media 
communication professionals in shaping post-crisis temporalities: how 
they contribute to constructing a memory of the crisis while outlining 
the contours of a possible future. The objective is to analyze the 
processes through which these narratives are crafted, the actors 
involved, and the political, social and cultural stakes they entail.

How do media and political discourse interact in shaping dominant 
post-crisis narratives? How do these post-crisis narratives influence 
collective perceptions of justice, resilience, and responsibility?

Six axes to explore the critical analysis of the return to “normality” :

Axis 1 - The role of the media in the construction of a “return to 
normality” narrative

Axis 2 - Political discourse and the media as a sounding board

Axis 3 - Resistance and mobilization

Axis 4 - Lived experience: witnesses, victims, those concerned...

Axis 5 - The “return to normality” as populist rhetoric

Axis 6 - The return to “normality” in identity and nationalist conflicts

We invite researchers to submit papers (in French, Greek, Italian, 
English or Spanish) on the mechanisms of the “return to normality”, 
discursive strategies and their social and political implications. The 
following link provides more details on the research themes of this Call 
for Papers: 
https://carism.assas-universite.fr/fr/appel-communication-apres-crise-medias-retour-normalite 
<https://carism.assas-universite.fr/fr/appel-communication-apres-crise-medias-retour-normalite>

https://carism.assas-universite.fr/sites/default/files/carism/carism-aac-apres_crise_medias.jpg 


////


Appel à communication - Après la crise, les médias et le «  retour à la 
normalité  » 
<https://carism.assas-universite.fr/fr/appel-communication-apres-crise-medias-retour-normalite>

Cet appel à communication vise à explorer les discours, les pratiques et 
les dynamiques de transition qui entourent la fin des crises, en 
adoptant une perspective centrée sur les études des médias. L’objectif 
est d’interroger le rôle et les pratiques des médias et des 
professionnels de la communication dans la structuration des 
temporalités post-crise : la manière dont ils

carism.assas-universite.fr

*Provisional calendar*

Circulation of call for papers: February 2025

Deadline for submission of proposals: May 12, 2025

Notification of acceptance: Week of June 23, 2025

Publication of program: September 15, 2025

Event in France scheduled: November 7, 2025

Event in Greece scheduled: June 2026

*Organizing committee*

Jaércio DA SILVA, Université Paris-Panthéon-Assas (IFP/Carism)

Cristian MONFORTE RUBIA, Université Paris-Panthéon-Assas (IFP/Carism)

Stefanos PNEVMATIKOS, University Paris-Panthéon-Assas (IFP/Carism)

////

*Call for Papers
After the Crisis: Media and the
“Return to Normality”***

/Paris and Athens—2025/2026/

The contemporary period is profoundly marked by the emergence and 
proliferation of new risks related to technical and scientific progress 
(Beck, 1992), by a saturation of events that are difficult to understand 
(Augé, 1994), and by an “ambiguous” and “catastrophic” conception of 
modernity (Latour, 1997). Crisis emerges as an omnipresent category in 
contemporary history (Koselleck, 2006): economic, political, health, 
environmental, and media crises… whether systemic crises, crises of 
growth, or institutional crises. The concept of crisis emerges as an 
omnipresent category in the contemporary history of our societies 
(Koselleck, 2006), encompassing crises related to event-driven 
“event-driven rupture” (Arquembourg, 2006), systemic crises, growth 
crises, and institutional crises. However, crises are not perceived 
uniformly: while some communities experience them as threats, others 
view them as opportunities. It is difficult to imagine a field of human 
and social sciences that has not mobilised this concept to analyse 
intense or enduring conflicts, sudden upheavals, decisive ruptures, or 
deep dysfunctions of the established order. As explained by Heurtaux, 
Renault, and Tarragoni (2023), a crisis is not merely an objective 
circumstance or a naturally imposed phenomenon; rather, it is understood 
as a process of qualification based on discursive operations (naming, 
interpreting, explaining) and practical actions (mobilisations, 
political decisions, media coverage). However, while the concept of 
crisis has been analysed and published, the “return to normality” 
question remains distinctly underexplored. What are the transitions 
between event-driven rupture and the “return to normality”? What 
discourses, practices, or imaginaries are associated with these 
transitions? When can a crisis be considered formally over? What does 
this “normal” mean? What criteria, temporalities, and processes define 
the transition from the exceptional to the every day, or from the 
perception of crisis to normality?

Let us take a symptomatic case of a so-called post-crisis: Greece 
provides an emblematic example of the ambiguous dynamics of exciting a 
crisis, where the official discourse of “restored normality” masks the 
lasting effects of the economic crisis. After a decade of austerity 
policies imposed by European institutions, the country displays a 
growing economy and a relative return of investor confidence. However, 
what about this period’s deep and persistent repercussions, especially 
on public infrastructure and the social fabric? A tragic event 
illustrates these tensions: On February 28, 2023, a collision between a 
passenger train and a freight train near Larissa resulted in the death 
of 57 people and 80 serious injuries. This tragedy sparked a wave of 
silent protests, including one in Syntagma Square in Athens, a highly 
symbolic location for popular demands since the first anti-austerity 
demonstrations. This railway disaster, largely attributed to 
dysfunctions resulting from the privatisation of the Greek railway 
company Trainose (which became Hellenic Train under Italian control in 
2017), reflects the post-crisis political compromises. The Greek and 
international press hastily highlighted the “return to normality” with 
narratives of economic progress and political stability. However, 
popular gatherings, such as the October 11, 2024 concert-protest at the 
Kallimarmaro stadium, reveal another reality: that of a people still 
suffering from the effects of political choices imposed during the 
crisis. This concert, organised in memory of the victims, reaffirmed a 
sense of belonging and silent solidarity, contrasting with the official 
narratives. Thus, the discourses highlighted by the media show a 
systematic attempt to transform symbolic events into proof of a return 
to normality, while obscuring the social and political consequences of 
the crisis. The question remains open: Is the discourse of the end of 
the crisis a reality experienced by Greek citizens or a communication 
strategy to attract investments and restore the country’s image on the 
international stage?

Greece is not an isolated case. Although distinct in their contexts and 
origins, other crises reveal similar dynamics where crisis management or 
exit discourses clash with lived realities. The COVID-19 pandemic 
highlighted structural weaknesses in health systems worldwide. Hospitals 
often said to be on the front lines of the crisis, had to manage a 
massive influx of patients with limited resources and no certified 
treatment. These challenges exposed persistent issues, such as chronic 
underfunding, staff shortages, and outdated infrastructure. While 
governments considered the pandemic crisis to be over, despite the 
ongoing disease, healthcare workers continue to denounce its lasting 
impacts: burnout, mass departures, and the system’s lack of resilience 
against other potential health crises. The question arises: how has the 
pandemic transformed the health order? Are we facing a new “normality” 
marked by permanent tensions?

A third example: Brazil illustrates a political crisis marked by 
institutional tensions and increased social polarisation. After a period 
of instability under Jair Bolsonaro (2019–2023), characterised by 
controversial pandemic management, massive environmental damage, and 
brutal attacks on democratic institutions, the return to power of Luis 
Inácio Lula da Silva in 2023 raised hopes for stabilisation. However, 
this transition comes with major challenges: reconciling a deeply 
divided country, rebuilding dismantled public policies, and fighting 
corruption and inequalities. This case highlights the difficulty of 
turning renewal discourses into concrete actions. Do the social, 
political, and economic crises of the “Bolsonaro years” remain vivid? 
How do the media perceive and portray the “post-Bolsonaro normality”?

This call for papers aims to explore the discourses, practices, and 
dynamics of transition that surround the end of crises, adopting a 
perspective centred on media studies. How do media narratives contribute 
to constructing the return to normality after a crisis? What mechanisms 
allow for imagining a fresh start or, on the contrary, projecting a 
return to life as it was before? The goal is to examine the role and 
practices of the media and communication professionals in structuring 
post-crisis temporalities: how they help to formulate a memory of the 
crisis while tracing the contours of a possible future. It involves 
analysing the processes of constructing these narratives, the actors who 
promote them, and the political, social, and cultural issues they raise. 
How can the role of the media and political discourses be articulated in 
shaping dominant post-crisis narratives? How do post-crisis narratives 
influence collective perceptions of justice, resilience, and responsibility?

The examples mentioned in this call are only an entry point to explore 
this issue; other case studies are welcomed enriching the reflection on 
the construction of collective narratives marking a return to an 
(alleged) “normality”. Furthermore, crises, although initially confined 
to a specific domain, often reveal their capacity to evolve and 
intertwine with other layers (Koselleck, 2006), illustrating a dynamic 
of permeability and circulation. This scenario, in which one crisis 
triggers a cascade of other disruptions, highlights how the return to 
“normality” can be complex and sometimes illusory.

Six Axes for a Critical Analysis of the “Return to Normality”**

Axis 1: The role of the media in constructing a return to normality**

In contemporary societies, the media play a central role in shaping 
narratives of crisis resolution. These narratives may adopt optimistic 
and consensual perspectives, often aligning with official discourses, or 
they may obscure persistent or emerging issues, creating the impression 
that the crisis has been resolved while its political, civic, and 
societal consequences continue to unfold. For example, in the Greek 
case, media coverage of economic recovery and foreign investments 
starkly contrasts with social realities, such as fragile public 
infrastructure and persistent inequalities. What media mechanisms 
contribute to this “normalisation” of discourse? What responsibilities 
do journalists have in balancing criticism with support for official 
narratives?

Axis 2: Political discourse and the media as a sounding board**

Political leaders often use the media as a channel to spread post-crisis 
success stories, focusing on specific indicators (growth, unemployment 
reduction) to reinforce their legitimacy and attract investments. This 
post-crisis storytelling sometimes transforms tragic or critical events 
into opportunities to demonstrate national resilience. The Brazilian 
case, with Lula emphasising a return to democratic stability after 
Bolsonaro, illustrates this strategy. What is the relationship between 
political and media narratives in these contexts? To what extent do 
post-crisis narratives serve specific political objectives?

Axis 3: Resistance and Mobilisation **

In response to official and/or dominant narratives, dissenting voices 
emerge to denounce the contradictions or shortcomings of post-crisis 
discourses. These resistance may take the form of popular mobilisations, 
such as the silent protests in Syntagma Square following the railway 
tragedy in Greece, or individual figures who act as spokespersons for 
these struggles, such as activists or intellectuals. How do these 
opposing voices reshape public debate? What methods do they use to 
contest official narratives and draw attention to hidden realities? What 
are the most effective means for dissident actors to intervene in the 
public space and influence these narratives?

Axis 4: Lived Experience: Perspectives of Witnesses, Victims, and Those 
Directly Affected**

This axis focuses on the experiences and trajectories of individuals 
directly affected by the crisis: victims, witnesses, and their families. 
These people, often on the front lines, are not only confronted with the 
immediate impacts of the crisis but also with the challenge of 
navigating a period of “return to normality”. This axis examines how the 
emotions of those directly affected are expressed in the public sphere, 
particularly through media narratives and associated commemorative 
practices. At the same time, it explores the diverse experiences of 
individuals who have endured the repercussions of a crisis—victims, 
witnesses, and others concerned—and their perception of a past that 
remains relevant in the present. In this regard, the axis interrogates 
the role of the media in shaping collective memory and the place of 
those affected within these narratives: how are these emotions 
articulated and narrated to construct a shared understanding of 
overcoming the crisis?

Axis 5: The “return to normality” as populist rhetoric **

The discourse of the “return to normality”, or the necessity of such a 
return, often emerges as an apparent response to crises. It is 
particularly mobilised by populist parties and movements to convey the 
idea of an idealised stability and an order that was lost during the 
crisis. Beneath this notion lies a discursive strategy aimed at 
exploiting citizens’ fears and frustrations by promising the restoration 
of a past era perceived as more prosperous, secure, and orderly—set in 
contrast to a contemporary reality deemed threatening and chaotic. This 
axis invites a critical examination of this sentiment of “regressive 
nostalgia” (Fantin, Niemeyer, and Dusfresne-Deslières, 2023). Similarly, 
political actors frequently invoke the rhetoric of “common sense” while 
their discourse remains deeply characterised by controversy and 
conflict. These dynamics further complicate and problematise the 
transnational analysis of such phenomena. Ultimately, the “return to 
normality” is accompanied by a persistent sense of crisis, strategically 
revived to legitimise increasing societal polarisation.

Axis 6: The “return to normality” in Identity and Nationalist Conflicts **

The “return to normality” can become a space of negotiation and 
confrontation around the nation and the “imagined and imagined 
communities” (Anderson, 1983) that emerge from it. At the same time, 
this concept also fuels forms of “banal nationalism” (Billig, 1995), 
which, without being explicitly conflictual, normalises nationalist 
practices and discourses in everyday life and institutions. For example, 
how is the discourse of “return to normality” mobilised in post-conflict 
contexts (Northern Ireland, former Yugoslavia, Baltic republics, etc.) 
or in contemporary independence movements (Catalonia, Scotland, Quebec, 
Flanders, Basque Country, etc.)? What are the characteristics of these 
discourses? How do these discursive forms relate to territories seeking 
national recognition? What is the defining characteristics of the 
discourses employed by various actors—national, pro-independence, civic, 
and media—to frame (or depict) their actions within the context of a 
“restored normality”? How do these discursive forms interact within 
territories seeking national recognition? Moreover, how do they relate 
to global narratives on national self-determination, peace, and normality?

Submitting a paper proposal **

Paper proposals must be submitted by May 12, 2025, to the members of the 
scientific committee: (stefanos.pnevmatikos /at/ u-paris2.fr) 
<mailto:(stefanos.pnevmatikos /at/ u-paris2.fr)> ,
(jaercio-bento.da-silva /at/ u-paris2.fr) 
<mailto:(jaercio-bento.da-silva /at/ u-paris2.fr)> and 
(cristian.monforte-rubia /at/ u-paris2.fr) 
<mailto:(cristian.monforte-rubia /at/ u-paris2.fr)> .

The working language is English. However, submissions in French, 
Spanish, Italian, or Greek will also be accepted and evaluated, provided 
that an abstract in English is also submitted.

Proposals must specify the thematic axis (or axes if the proposal 
addresses multiple ones) of the call for papers:

Proposals should specify the thematic axis (or axes, if the proposal 
aligns with multiple) and the preferred location of participation 
(Paris, Athens, or both).

Submissions must not exceed 3,000 characters (including spaces) and 
should include the following elements: the subject of the presentation, 
its disciplinary, theoretical, and methodological orientation, the 
research question addressed, the main expected findings, a selected 
bibliography, and a brief biography of the author.

Once anonymised, paper proposals will be evaluated through a 
double-blind process by members of the scientific committee. Proposals 
from all disciplinary fields will be considered.

Provisional calendar **

Call for Papers release: February 2025

Proposal submission deadline: May 12, 2025

Notification of acceptance: Week of June 23, 2025

Publication of the Program on September 15, 2025

The event in France is scheduled for November 7, 2025

The event in Greece is scheduled for June 2026

Organising Committee**

Jaércio da Silva, Université Paris-Panthéon-Assas (IFP/Carism)

Cristian Montforte Rubia, Université Paris-Panthéon-Assas (IFP/Carism)

Stefanos Pnevmatikos, Université Paris-Panthéon-Assas (IFP/Carism)

Scientific Committee**

Karina ABDALA MOREIRA, Université Clermont Auvergne
RomainBADOUARD, Université Paris-Panthéon-Assas
Nataly BOTERO, Université Paris-Panthéon-Assas
Marie France CHAMBAT-HOUILLON, Université Paris-Panthéon-Assas
Fabrice D’ALMEIDA, Université Paris-Panthéon-Assas
Valérie DEVILLARD, Université Paris-Panthéon-Assas
Angeliki GAZI, Université Panteion d’Athènes
Luís GONZÁLEZ, École des Hautes Études Hispaniques et Ibériques — Casa 
de Velázquez
Achilleas KARADIMITRIOU, Université Panteion d’Athènes
Anna Maria LORUSSO, Università di Bologna
Antoine MACHUT, Université Paris-Panthéon-Assas
Tristan MATELLART, Université Paris-Panthéon-Assas
Sebastian MORENO, Universidad ORT de Uruguay
Katharina NIEMEYER, Université du Québec à Montréal
Marianna PSILLA, Université Panteion d’Athènes
Franciscu SEDDA, Università degli Studi di Cagliari
Gérôme TRUC, CNRS - ISP
Mirco VANNONI, Università degli Studi di Palermo
Pantelis VATIKIOTIS, Université Panteion d’Athènes
Ioanna VOVOU, Université Panteion d’Athènes

Indicative Bibliography**

Anderson, Benedict. 1983. /Imagined Communities: Reflections on the 
Origin and Spread of Nationalism./ London : Verso

Arquembourg, Jocelyne. 2006. De l’événement international à l’événement 
global : émergence et manifestations d’une sensibilité mondiale/. 
Hermès/, 46

Augé, Marc. 1994. /Pour une anthropologie des mondes contemporains/. 
Paris : Aubier.

Beck, Ulrich. 1992. /Risk society: towards a new modernity/. London: 
Sage Publications.

Billig, Michael. 1995. /Banal nationalism/. London ; Thousand Oaks, 
Calif.: Sage

Cagé, Julia. 2016. Médias et démocratie in /L’économie au secours du 
politique. /Paris : La Découverte.

Cefaï, Daniel. 2009. « Comment se mobilise-t-on ? L’apport d’une 
approche pragmatiste à la sociologie de l’action collective », 
/Sociologie et société/, n° 41, p. 245-269.

Cefaï, Daniel. 2016. « Publics, problèmes publics, arènes publiques… Que 
nous apprend le pragmatisme ? /», Questions de communication/, n° 30, 
p. 25-64.

Charaudeau, Patrick. 2024. /Le discours populiste, un brouillage des 
enjeux politiques/. Limoges : Éditions Lambert-Lucas.

Dobry, Michel. 2009. /Sociologie des crises politiques : la dynamique 
des mobilisations multisectorielles./ Paris : Presses de la fondation 
nationale des sciences politiques.

Eco, Umberto. 2006/. Reculons comme une écrevisse./ Paris : Éditions Grasset

Fantin, Emmanuelle, Katharina Niemeyer, and Corine Dufresne-Deslières. 
2023. “Nostalgies et remédiations du passé en politique, ou le danger 
des abus de la mémoire”. /Questions de communication, /nᵒ 44, p. 263-282.

Garcin-Marrou, Isabelle. 2001. /Terrorisme, médias et démocratie/. 
Lyon : Presses universitaires de Lyon.

Garcin-Marrou, Isabelle, Hare, Isabelle. 2018. « Discours médiatiques 
post-attentats : une perspective historique (1995-2016) ». /Mots. Les 
langages du politique,/ nº 118, p. 19-35.

Gellner, Ernesto. 1981. /Nations et nationalisme/. Paris : Payot

Heurtaux, Jérôme, Rachel Renault, et Federico Tarragoni. 2023. « États 
de crise ». /Tracés. Revue de Sciences humaines, /nᵒ 44, p. 9‑27.

Koselleck, Reinhart. 2006. « Crisis ». /Journal of the History of 
Ideas,/ nᵒ 67, p. 357–400.

Latour, Bruno. 1997. /Nous n’avons jamais été modernes : essai 
d’anthropologie symétrique/. Paris : La Découverte.

Labrecque-Lebeau, Lisandre. 2022. « De l’envers à l’endroit : pour une 
sociologie de la normalité ». /Cahiers de recherche sociologique/, 
nᵒ 72, p. 61‑74.

Lits, Marc. 2004. /Du 11 septembre à la riposte. Les débuts d’une 
nouvelle guerre médiatique/. Paris : De Boeck Supérieur.

Morin, Edgar. 1976. « Pour une crisologie ». /Communications,/ nº. 25, 
p. 149-163.

Nora, Pierre. 1972. L’événement monstre. /Communications,/ /18, /p. 162-172

Nora, Pierre. 2015. Retour sur un événement monstre. /Le Débat nº 185,/ 
p. 04-10

Tardy, Thierry. 2009. Gestion de crise, maintien et consolidation de la 
paix. Acteurs, activités, défis. Paris : De Boeck Supérieur

---------------
The COMMLIST
---------------
This mailing list is a free service offered by Nico Carpentier. Please use it responsibly and wisely.
--
To subscribe or unsubscribe, please visit http://commlist.org/
--
Before sending a posting request, please always read the guidelines at http://commlist.org/
--
To contact the mailing list manager:
Email: (nico.carpentier /at/ commlist.org)
URL: http://nicocarpentier.net
---------------