policy & reform
We can’ t really afford to lose the public on this one. There is too much dependent on it. We have to try to keep the messages simple. To change behaviour you have to be consistent and constant. You need a very clear message and to use it day in and day out.
So what implications does this have for our sector? And why would a person who represents university managers take an interest?
Tertiary institutions still enjoy the favour of the public. For most people, the titles of professor and doctor still conjure up the idea of a learned expert who gives an honest opinion without fear or favour.
Professionals in our sector understand the need for wellrun public relations. Whether we like it or not the realm of public opinion matters and all of it, from newspapers to the Twittersphere, is important in representations of what we do as tertiary education institutions.
It is time for academics and professionals at tertiary institutions to start to defend their territory. In the age of Twitter and Facebook, it is time for academics to make more of an effort to defend their work and to do it with some media savvy.
At conferences, tertiary institutions are often lectured to about consolidating their brand. So, what image do we present to the community? Our brand is to be at least sensible, learned, inspiring and trustworthy. When statements are made that vigorously offend these principles, then we must go on the offensive. Our brand is under attack, now more than ever before. Research is easily mocked by those with a vested interest – and how easy it is to convince those with no frame of reference to believe the spin.
Although it may court controversy, this is a course of action we must follow. Our institutions are different from normal businesses: we hold to science and fact. We also hold to beauty, philosophy and the human spirit. Our society is better understood through an appreciation of the sciences and the humanities.
It is clear that steps are already being taken by media-savvy universities. The Conversation is a tremendous example of this. It infuriates vested interests and long may it do so.
But until we all tackle the mainstream and become the dominant source of knowledge, our society is diminished.
Academics and professionals need to work together to achieve these goals. Academics are not trained to be media celebrities, nor have they ever needed to be in the past but this is where PR and marketing departments in universities must come into their own. They must assist their academics in getting out these messages. The identification of media talent and media training for academics must become more important.
The large universities in particular have a great role to play in this. They have experts in almost every learning endeavour. They are the knowledge hubs of our time. We need to elevate that role, already easily understood by the community, to the point where their opinion is the cut-through when we are surrounded by noise.
I recently came across a great example of an academic’ s frustration that this is not happening.
The latest edition of the Sydney University alumni magazine, SAM, includes a contribution by professor Mark Adams, dean of agriculture and environment at the University of Sydney and one of Australia’ s foremost authorities on bushfires.
Adams explains exactly what I am talking about in relation to the way the scientific community communicates its messages.“ Selling the message( about how to prevent bushfires) to the public and policy makers means that scientists need to speak with a clear voice,” he writes.“ The scientific community can speak among itself with fine nuance about fire regimes and intervals, but when we do we have completely lost the general public who haven’ t a clue what we’ re talking about.
“ We can’ t really afford to lose the public on this one. There is too much dependent on it. We have to try to keep the messages simple. To change behaviour you have to be consistent and constant. You need a very clear message and to use it day in and day out.”
How many people have heard of Adams? Was he the chief spokesperson in the debate on the cause of the recent bushfires in NSW, or was it Miranda Devine blaming the Greens on Gosford Council, a council currently held by conservatives?
Adams does not have the weight of a powerful media company behind him but he has the weight of authority. To get the message out, he needs assistance from professionals who know what needs to be done. The need for an effective partnership between academics, university leadership and professional staff can never be clearer.
This will require some commitment, but it is not onerous. The news cycle moves quickly so someone like Adams might only be called on to give his opinion two or three times a year. The essential thing is that he does, that he is the go-to man on this.
Our authoritative source must be the expert, someone who has spent a lifetime researching and studying, the professionals who are our academics. Professional managers in tertiary education have a role in facilitating this. We must train and encourage our academics to clearly correct errors and spin.
Such intervention in the public discourse will require courage. Views that do not align with a political agenda will probably need to be defended more than once, but we are all big enough to be able to handle this. After all, this is a defence of someone’ s life work and a defence of our brand.
If there is a lack of courage then we should look at the humanities for inspiration:“ Few men are willing to brave the disapproval of their fellows, the censure of their colleagues, the wrath of their society. Moral courage is a rarer commodity than bravery in battle or great intelligence. Yet it is the one essential, vital quality of those who seek to change a world which yields most painfully to change.” – Ernest Hemingway, A Farewell to Arms, 1929 n
Paul Abela is executive director at the Association for Tertiary Education Management. campusreview. com. au | 19