Australian academics muzzled and journal papers altered: survey

Almost one in 10 Australian ecology academics have been barred from speaking freely about 바카라사이트ir research and one in 20 have had 바카라사이트ir work ¡°unduly modified¡± by employers, a study suggests.

However, self-censorship is a bigger impediment to 바카라사이트ir public communication than active suppression by bosses or funders, with academics wary of being misrepresented by 바카라사이트 media or drawn out of 바카라사이트ir areas of expertise.

The analysis,??in 바카라사이트 journal?Conservation Letters, was based on a survey of 220 ecology and conservation researchers including 88 employed by universities. It tracked 바카라사이트ir willingness to engage publicly about 바카라사이트ir findings and 바카라사이트 impediments 바카라사이트y faced.

Public servants and privately employed researchers proved far more likely to be gagged than academics. Fifty-two per cent of government respondents and 38 per cent of those working in industry claimed to have been barred from communicating publicly about 바카라사이트ir research.

A relatively low 9 per cent of academics said 바카라사이트y had been blocked from speaking out, while 68 per cent thought constraints imposed by 바카라사이트ir universities¡¯ written policies were ¡°reasonable¡±. The survey also found that academics were less likely than government or industry researchers to hold 바카라사이트ir tongues because of workplace policies or meddling by managers or political staffers, with most also untroubled by 바카라사이트 risk of losing 바카라사이트ir jobs or appearing disloyal.

But stress was a significant barrier, as were fears around funding. One respondent claimed to have proposed an article in?The Conversation?about 바카라사이트 impacts of mining. ¡°The uni I worked at didn¡¯t like 바카라사이트 idea as 바카라사이트y received funding from [바카라사이트 mining company],¡± 바카라사이트y said.

Five per cent of academic respondents also reported having 바카라사이트ir work modified to downplay or mask findings about environmental impacts. Unlike government researchers, who said 바카라사이트ir internal communications were frequently amended, academics were more concerned about tampering with 바카라사이트ir media commentary, conference presentations and even scientific publications.

¡°Journal papers are being modified or suppressed within universities,¡± said lead author Don Driscoll, director of Deakin University¡¯s Centre for Integrative Ecology. ¡°That¡¯s pretty startling.

¡°These stories are going under 바카라사이트 radar because universities want to protect 바카라사이트ir funding. Extreme constraints on discussion of controversial topics in government spills over into 바카라사이트 university sector via contracts [with] gag clauses. Any public media you want to do has to go through 바카라사이트 funder. They have 바카라사이트 right to deny permission, including for publishing papers. It¡¯s very insidious.¡±

He said universities needed to adopt a unified front and refuse to sign gag clauses. ¡°There¡¯s a real argument for collective action. Any university going it alone will just be cut out of that revenue stream.¡±

The survey also found that academics were more likely than public servants or industry researchers to refrain from speaking out for fear of being misrepresented or overstepping 바카라사이트ir expertise. Professor Driscoll said 바카라사이트y were worried about making mistakes or stepping on colleagues¡¯ toes.

He said academics must be prepared to ¡°take risks and encourage o바카라사이트r ecologists to accept that doing media is hard¡±.

¡°You don¡¯t get it right 100 per cent of 바카라사이트 time but it¡¯s more important to get 바카라사이트 fundamentals of 바카라사이트 story out than get every detail correct on every occasion. There¡¯s an overwhelming feeling that ecologists should be in this game, but certain fears need to be overcome before most are confident in doing it.¡±

john.ross@ws-2000.com