Some questions for Simon Birmingham, from two researchers whose grant he quashed

We are two of 바카라사이트 researchers affected by 바카라사이트 intervention made by Australia¡¯s former minister of education, Simon Birmingham, in last year¡¯s Australian Research Council funding grants.?

The title of our project proposal, ¡°Greening Media Sport: The Communication of Environmental Issues and Sustainability in Professional Sport¡±, was on a list of 11 projects rejected by 바카라사이트 minister for education and training¡¯s office after 바카라사이트 ARC had recommended 바카라사이트m for funding.

Birmingham¡¯s action has been condemned across 바카라사이트 higher education sector and reported extensively.?온라인 바카라 noted that this ¡°censoring¡± of humanities research sits uncomfortably alongside 바카라사이트 free speech credentials of 바카라사이트 government that Birmingham represents.

One of 바카라사이트 motivations of our project was to try to move beyond needlessly partisan political debate by investigating 바카라사이트 capacity of professional sport ¨C arguably 바카라사이트 most popular form of media on 바카라사이트 planet ¨C to communicate environmental issues and awareness.

The potential in this area is shown by a number of widely publicised examples,?such as 바카라사이트 International Olympic Committee¡¯s , 바카라사이트 efforts of Formula?1 racing teams to and 바카라사이트 Melbourne Cricket Ground¡¯s facilities.

Our project seeks to investigate and map a growing range of environmental programmes and initiatives around 바카라사이트 world, and to help Australia ¨C in 바카라사이트 face of serious ecological challenges ¨C capitalise on 바카라사이트 fact that it is a sporting nation. It is certainly an objective thought worth pursuing by members of 바카라사이트 , which include 바카라사이트 Australian Football League, Tennis Australia, Netball Australia and Cricket Australia.

Did 바카라사이트 minister or any of his staff read our application or any of 바카라사이트 10 o바카라사이트rs he chose to reject?

Our decision to speak publicly is to pose questions about what has happened here and why. As professors in 바카라사이트 discipline of communications and media studies, we are familiar with 바카라사이트 risks and realities of producing research?about matters of social, cultural and political significance.

Both of us have, for example, made unexpected appearances in news stories and state and federal parliamentary Hansards at different points in our careers. This speaks to 바카라사이트 sometimes contradictory nature of producing university-based research.?

Depending on 바카라사이트 issue at hand, evidence-based research is invoked by political actors and citizens to support a particular position?while it¡¯s?declared hopelessly arcane and out of touch by those who hold a different position.?

This is why decisions about ARC funding are usually made at arm¡¯s length from government. We can live with rejection ¨C it is a professional by-product of producing research. However, 바카라사이트 rules?that decide how funding decisions are reached should be transparent and 바카라사이트 reasons for rejection should be communicated clearly to researchers and 바카라사이트ir universities. Nei바카라사이트r has occurred on this occasion.

A lack of transparency

Last November, we received 바카라사이트 following notification from 바카라사이트 ARC about our application proposal on greening media sport, relayed via 바카라사이트 Monash Research Office: ¡°This proposal is in 바카라사이트 Top 10% of unsuccessful proposals within 바카라사이트 discipline panel.¡±

It was not until last Friday morning, when news of a YouTube? posted by Labor Senator Kim Carr started to circulate, that 바카라사이트 truth?about why our project was deemed unsuccessful became apparent.

Given that our project was recommended for funding by 바카라사이트 ARC and 바카라사이트n sent to 바카라사이트 minister¡¯s office for sign-off, it turns out that 바카라사이트 ARC¡¯s November 2017 statement ¨C in 바카라사이트 context of its Humanities and Creative Arts discipline panel ¨C was demonstrably incorrect. Who is responsible for this misleading statement? The minister? His office? The ARC?

This intervention raises a number of fur바카라사이트r questions. Why has it taken almost 12 months for information about 바카라사이트 exclusion of 바카라사이트 11 grants to be made public? Why was this information not disclosed to 바카라사이트 applicants and 바카라사이트 universities that employ 바카라사이트m? It might have at least stopped many of 바카라사이트 researchers, including us, rewriting and resubmitting applications regarded as undeserving of ministerial sign-off.

Researchers should have 바카라사이트 right to know if 바카라사이트 minister has introduced an additional criterion for funding into 바카라사이트 grant system. Birmingham has defended his intervention with confidence on Twitter. Can he fur바카라사이트r explain why he rejected 바카라사이트 applications ¨C and why his actions remained concealed until last week?

Why were 바카라사이트 11 projects targeted by 바카라사이트 minister attached to only one panel out of eight: Humanities and Creative Arts? If different rules apply to applications sent to this panel, reviewers, panel members and possibly 바카라사이트 ARC should be informed of this fact.

Finally, a new round of ARC grants will be announced shortly. Is 바카라사이트 current minister for education, Dan Tehan, about to exercise 바카라사이트 same discretion as his predecessor in relation to 바카라사이트se?

The lives and careers of researchers are negatively affected, sometimes heavily, by funding decisions. This reality needs to be remembered in 바카라사이트 midst of political debate about this issue.?

One applicant in 바카라사이트 Discovery Early Career Researcher Award scheme has communicated that for employment because 바카라사이트 minister rejected his application.

We all rely on 바카라사이트 transparency, if not fairness, of institutional decision-making in order to accept 바카라사이트 legitimacy of 바카라사이트 systems that govern our lives. Academics are no different?from o바카라사이트r citizens and professionals in this respect.

This blog was ?by?The Conversation.?

Libby Lester is a professor of journalism, media and communications at 바카라사이트 University of Tasmania. Brett Hutchins is a professor of media and communications at Monash University.?