Our midyear board meeting is now behind us and I will take the opportunity of this presidential column to report on some of the outcomes of this online discussion, which took place from 17-28 January.

First, I am happy to report that ICA is in very good financial shape, with a net gain of US$129,000 for the 2009-2010 fiscal year. After a healthy discussion, the ICA executive committee, decided that this gain would be used to pay down part of the principal on the ICA offices, located, as you know, in Washington, DC. As for the 2010-2011 year, it looks like ICA is presently on target regarding its projections for income and expenditure and that the finances of our association should also be in good condition by the end of the present fiscal year.

Regarding the 2016 conference site selection, the board examined three potential sites that are currently promoted by local communication associations. These sites are (1) the Gold Coast/Brisbane, Australia; (2) Fukuoka, Japan; and (3) Shanghai, China. Among these three sites, it is the candidatures of Japan and China that received the most support from the board, with some board members mentioning concerns regarding human rights issues for China. We will have more information on this important topic for Boston.

Regarding the Taskforce on Political Engagement, chaired by Sandra Braman, I am happy to report that the board agreed by consensus on seven recommendations that were made by this taskforce. These recommendations were to 1) revisit the mission of our association in the light of the question of political engagement; 2) establish clear procedures that would help the ICA board and executive committee evaluate political issues and forms of engagement that would be brought to their attention; 3) separate personal from organizational positions; 4) keep records of all the decisions that are made with regard to ICA political engagement; 5) formally incorporate political factors when it is time to evaluate conference venues; 6) survey the ICA membership regarding what they perceive to be the functions of our association; and 7) publish guidelines. Following this positive reaction from the board, it was decided that, based on these recommendations, policies would be proposed for adoption at the Boston board meeting.

The position of International Communication Director was also discussed. As you know, this new position was officially created last June in Singapore, and it was agreed that the person who would fill it would be responsible for leading the "strategic direction initiatives and planning, coordination, and management of the ICA's integrated marketing, public relations, and strategic communications program." During the midyear board meeting, it was asked that the taskforce on international communication director, chaired by Alison Bryant, focus on the ways to evaluate/monitor the position over the first 3 years. We also agreed to ask that the taskforce continue to focus on ways to finance the position. A final report will be submitted to the board in Boston, which means that we should be able to publicize this position in July-August 2011 and that the new director might consequently start working in January of February 2012.

The report written by the Taskforce on New Possible Session Formats, chaired by Steve McDowell, was also discussed. The ultimate recommendation was that the annual postconference survey serve as a way to get as much input as possible from ICA members regarding new and existing formats for ICA sessions. The suggestion was also made to include questions regarding the possibility of limiting the number of submissions. Although a recommendation to limit the number of submissions was rejected in Singapore, the taskforce might offer an alternative way to do that.

In response to the report submitted by the Membership/Internationalization Committee, chaired by Boris Brummans, the board also supported the idea of increasing the number of non-North American conference paper/panel reviewers for Divisions and Interest Groups. While having "quotas" is not something that is supported by the board, Division and Interest Group chairs and vice-chairs will be strongly encouraged to broaden their reach for members when they look for reviewers. Given that our association membership roughly is made of 60% North American and 40% non-North American, we could imagine that this ratio be used as a target when it is time to select reviewers at the Interest Group and Division levels.

During this board meeting, it was also agreed that a guide tentatively titled "ICA for Newcomers" should be produced to help those who are new to our association (or just interested in it) better understand how it is organized and how it works. There was also a consensus about the key role that ICA regional conferences might play to publicize our association in regions of the world that have been historically underrepresented in our membership. In this regard, the Membership/Internationalization committee agreed to work on guidelines that will help the executive committee evaluate applications to organize such conferences.

Regarding the efforts made by ICA to become greener, the board also agreed that it does not seem the time yet to eliminate the printed version of the program, as there still seems to be some attachment to this (old-fashioned?) format. One possible solution that the board discussed was to have an additional fee if members want to get a printed version. It also seems clear that non-U.S. scholars will be disadvantaged with the version for cell phones, given the extra cost, when the conference will take place in the United States (it will be, of course, the opposite when the conference takes place outside the US). The board also discussed options such as the possibility of having smaller versions of the program with less information.

Consequently, the Taskforce on Greening ICA, chaired by Chad Raphael, was asked to work on the scholarship and education aspect of their recommendations. The fact that there seems to be some interest in founding an Environmental Communication Interest Group is a sign in the right direction.

Finally, the Publication Committee, chaired by Amy Jordan, is currently working on a standardized form that could be used by all ICA journals to make their report to the ICA board. This will help us compare journals with each other and will allow us to see, for instance, tendencies in terms of what nationalities, gender, topics, etc. are under- or overrepresented in our publications. A joint meeting will also be scheduled between the publications and membership/ internationalization committees for the ICA conference in Boston in order to see how we could increase the international scope of authorship and editorial boards.

Additionally, the Publication Committee discussed the possibility of creating a standardized review form that could be used by editors in soliciting reviews from all countries. By creating such a form, the committee hopes to address the perception that the organization and constructiveness of the reviews may be idiosyncratic based on where the reviewer is from.

As of now, I can also report that we have not been able to find new editors for Communication Yearbook and Communication Theory, but the publication committee is actively searching for potential candidates.

Looking forward to seeing you in Boston to pursue these discussions and debates.