I was thrilled when it was announced, a few days ago, that the next Digital Arts and Culture conference will be held in Perth!!! My home town! Yay! Andrew Hutchison will be chairing the conference, it has support from all four universities in Perth and all the administration will be done by BEAP, which will be hosting the conference. It sounds fantastic. So, DAC2007 is being held in September in Perth. Wildflower season! Spring!

Then today I noticed that the next Association of Internet Researchers conference is not being held in Europe, as I’d assumed, but in Brisbane! Yes, Australia, again! AoIR 7.0 will be held Sept 27-30 in Brisbane. Reading this note from a Brazilian about the difficulties of aquiring a visa to come to the US if you’re not lucky enough to be a citizens of the handful of rich countries with a visa waiver, I reckon it’s wonderful having the conference outside of the US. I’m not sure Australia’s visa policies are any better, but both Brisbane and Perth are close to Asia, which should lead to new people having easier access to these gathering.

I probably won’t make it to Brisbane, but certainly hope to be at DAC07.


Discover more from Jill Walker Rettberg

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

4 thoughts on “conferences in australia!

  1. KF

    Actually, of the six AOIR conferences that have been held thus far, three have been held outside the U.S., which is a pretty good track record for such a young organization. And that’s actually three of the last four, which is even better. This is the conference’s first venture outside of North American/Europe, though, which is a very exciting development for the organization’s diversity…

  2. Elin

    But not Australia again! That’s so expensive, isn’t it?
    I do agree that conferences should be held outside the US because of the visa politics. It would send the US a MAJOR message if all conferences were to be held outside their borders and might have an impact on what happens with their policies in the future.
    I’m sure they would think twice when they realize they would be taking away their own citizen’s opportunity to participate in important research.

  3. KF

    I do agree with you Elin, except that within the US, the same scholars whose opportunities for participating in such conferences would be threatened by the move of those conferences outside the US are the ones organizing the conferences *within* the US. I can’t tell if that sentence makes sense. What I mean to say is that no matter how much US scholars are in agreement with such a position, and no matter how much we/they want to send a message to the government about its visa politics, self-interest will likely win out. (Not to mention that the government would be all too likely to say “great, don’t go to or hold conferences; you guys are just troublemakers anyway.”)

  4. Jill

    Oh, of course we need to arrange conferences wherever we can. And yes, I know it’s expensive getting to Australia – for those of us not already there or in Asia, anyway. Really the goal ought to be to spread em out, ya know, some here, some there. And of course we need regional and national conferences as well as international ones 🙂

Leave A Comment

Recommended Posts

Screenshot of a paragraph from a New York Times article published May 12, 2026. Text reads: "The price of tomatoes -tart bursts of flavor in salads and sandwiches — surged nearly 40 percent in April from a year ago on a combination of bad weather, high tariffs and climbing transportation costs."
AI STORIES

Genre glitches and unexpected promotional phrases as a sign of AI writing

A genre glitch is a characteristic of LLM-assisted writing where the text suddenly switches genre, typically inserting a short promotional phrase full of sensory details into an informational text. Genre glitches occur when a word in the generated text is heavily associated with a genre or context that is markedly […]

Top of a ransom note from Shinyhunters hacking group. Text reads: "SHINYHUNTERS rooting your systems since '19 ;) ShinyHunters has breached Instructure (again). Instead of contacting us to resolve it they ignored us and did some "security patches"."
Networked Politics University politics

UiB self-hosts the open source version of Canvas, so wasn’t affected by the breach

On May 1st Canvas announced a security breach, and then yesterday the system was hacked. The login page was replaced by a ransom note: if universities don’t pay up by 12 May, student data will be released. Here’s what the login page looked like yesterday: Way back in 2015, when […]

AI and algorithmic culture Networked Politics

AI-generated images, fascist aesthetics: Dieselbrølet and Heimatstrom

My German is pretty dodgy, so when I first saw Heimatstrom on Bluesky, shared by Roland Meyer, a professor of visual culture at Universität Zürich’s Digital Society Initiative, I misinterpreted it and thought it was a far-right campaign. But no, Heimatstrom is a group of left-wing environmentalists using fascist AI […]

Photo of a billboard ad at Oslo S train station showing a smiliing conductor and the text "Du må ikke sove. Joda, bare sov du."
AI STORIES

“Du må ikke sove”: a floating motif detached from its meaning (or: LLMs can write Norwegian but miss cultural references)

There’s a new ad for the train between Stavanger and Oslo in Norway that uses a line from Arnulf Øverland’s famous anti-fascist poem Du må ikke sove (“You must not sleep”). Du må ikke sove, you must not sleep, the ad says. And then it flips it, jovially, joda, bare […]

Academics in Norway: Sign this petition asking for research-based discussions of how to use AI in universities

I just signed a petition calling for Norwegian universities to use research expertise on AI when deciding how to implement it, rather than having decisions be made mostly administratively. ,  If you are a researcher in Norway, please read it and sign it if you agree – and share with anyone else who might be interested. The petition was written by three researchers at UiT: Maria Danielsen (a philosopher who completed her PhD in 2025 on AI and ethics, including discussions of art and working life), Knut Ørke (Norwegian as a second language), and Holger Pötzsch (a professor of media studies with many years of research on digital media, video games, disruption, and working life, among other topics).  This is not about preventing researchers from exploring AI methods in their research. It is about not uncritically accepting the hype that everyone must use AI everywhere without critical reflection. It is about not introducing Copilot as the default option in word processors, or training PhD candidates to believe they will fall behind if they do not use AI when writing articles, without proper academic discussion. Changes like these should be knowledge-based and discussed academically, not merely decided administratively, because they alter the epistemological foundations of research. Maria wrote to me a couple of months ago because she had read my opinion piece in Aftenposten in which I called for a strong brake on the use of language models in knowledge work. She was part of a committee tasked with developing UiT’s AI strategy and was concerned because there was so much hype and so few members of the committee with actual expertise in AI. I fully support the petition. There are probably some good uses for AI in research, but the uncritical, hype-driven insistence that we must simply adopt it everywhere is highly risky. There are many researchers in Norway with strong expertise in AI, language, ethics, working life, and culture. We must make use of this expertise. This is also partly about respect for research in the humanities, social sciences, psychology, and law. Introducing AI at universities and university colleges is not merely a technical issue, and perhaps not even primarily a technical one. It concerns much more: philosophy of science, methodological reflection, epistemology, writing, publishing, the working environment, and more. […]

screenshot of Grammarly - main text in the middle, names of experts on the left with reccomendations and on the right more info about the expert review feature
AI and algorithmic culture Teaching

Grammarly generated fake expert reviews “by” real scholars

Grammarly is a full on AI plagiarism machine now, generating text, citations (often irrelevant), “humanizing” the text to avoid AI checkers and so on. If you’re an author or scholar, they also have been impersonating and offering “feedback” in your name. Until yesterday, when they discontinued the Expert Review feature due to a class action lawsuit. Here are screenshots of how it worked.