05.11.2025, 04:15
Dear signatories,
Thanks again for supporting the petition “ICMPC/ESCOM 2027 must be inclusive and sustainable". I finally received a response to our petition from the ESCOM and ICMPC committees.
It’s an impressive example of denial, of both privilege and emissions. One gets the impression that research on music perception and cognition (or even just conference tourism) is more important than the future of humanity.
For climate activists, the style of writing is familiar. In the research literature on climate denial, this kind of discourse is called virtue signalling, tokenism, green sheen, sustainability rhetoric, performative environmentalism, or simply empty promises.
I noticed two specific problems:
1. The text repeatedly expresses concern without plausibly promising corresponding action. For example, there is no commitment to emissions transparency through independently controlled carbon accounting. That would reveal yet another high-carbon conference, like the last two ICMPCs.
2. The text focuses on small issues, ignoring big ones as if they don’t exist. The authors are pretending not to see the “elephant in the room” – the one we described in the petition text.
Meanwhile, 15 colleagues have offered to organize hubs or help find hub organizers in their regions. We only need about 7 hubs. Several multi-hub conferences have been held successfully, and there are good peer-reviewed papers on the organizational detail.
One gets the impression that the real reason for clinging to a 20th-century conference tradition is not being stated.
Please let me know your thoughts. It helps me a lot to get your feedback and personal viewpoints.
Yours
Richard
