In this issue, we present seven reflective and thought-provoking articles that might be roughly grouped in three categories.

The first three deal with international issues or figures. Pavel Sorokin critiques Michael Burawoy’s model of “public sociology” from the perspective of Russian intellectual history and the organization of sociology in that nation. He argues against Burawoy’s “organic public sociology” as overly politicized, and advocates instead a scientific-ethics approach as exemplified by the career of Russian-American sociologist Pitirim A Sorokin.

Roger Pizzaro Milian and Neil McLaughlin next consider whether “neo-liberal forces” have succeeded in corporatizing and vocationalizing sociology in Canada. On the basis of an analysis of marketing practices of English-speaking sociology departments, they reject this pessimistic view and conclude, instead, that sociology relates to multiple and diverse stakeholders.

Jerome Braun provides a European-oriented perspective through a searching examination of Max Horkheimer’s Critique of Instrumental Reason. Braun contends that Horkheimer, and the Frankfurt School more generally, did not appreciate the importance of an American-style pragmatism (a la the Chicago School) in proposals for social reform. He also weaves in a comparison of Horkheimer’s critique of authoritarian modernization and Christopher’s Lasch’s critique of narcissism as anti-modernization.

Next is a pair of articles that focus on communication practices in the discipline. Hannah Wohl and Gary Alan Fine look at the teaching of scholarly reading in graduate education, and they argue for the potential benefits of “more explicit training in reading.” Wohl and Fine conclude with suggestions for how graduate programs in sociology might “incorporate reading education into the curriculum.”

James C. Petersen next makes the case that the fine arts can be a valuable resource for those who “wish to improve their ability to communicate effectively with their peers, with political figures, and with the general public.” Drawing upon the experiences of sculptors, story tellers, and jazz musicians, he presents four lessons for sociologists.

The final category is public sociology, including both pedagogy and social policy. Christopher Schneider examines how professional sociologists have actually made use of the social media platform, Twitter. On the basis of an empirical examination of some 150,000 tweets, he contends that social media have generated the possibility of an “e-public” sociology, that is, a variant of public sociology in which “the sociologist can simultaneously be the generator and interlocutor of dialogue with multiple publics.”

Ofer Sharone, finally, considers “sociologically informed discourses and practices” as a support system for long-term unemployed workers. His key argument is that empirically grounded sociological narratives of “the shared and structural roots of unemployment” can reduce the debilitating effects of self-stigmatization among unemployed persons.

I also wish to note a typographical error in the Editor’s Introduction to our March 2017 issue, which mistakenly referred to Dr. Fran Osrecki as “she,” rather than “he.” My apologies to Dr. Osrecki for any confusion this may have inadvertently caused.