Academics Chat Thread

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

I believe the old Chat thread has fallen off the front page of this section, and I thought it might be time to reinstate it. I know it's only sporadically useful, but sometimes it's nice, right?

I am a lowly postdoctoral English Lit type. Finished my PhD in 2014, teaching associate for a couple of years, and now part-time while DD is a baby. I'm currently working frantically to get my book manuscript to the publisher by my deadline (October), and also trying to regain enthusiasm for the job market.

Who else is lurking around here?

Is it really acceptable, though, that academics are expected to work with journalists etc for free?

I do think consultations of academics are often exploitative. Journalists and others would not expect people from outside academia to give up so much time for free. A lot of the questions I am asked are ones that could have answered without my help, by more careful reading or basic internet searches. I am often being used to save their time, but this wastes my time and I'm not paid for doing it.

I am not sure who gets paid by journalists for information. Maybe lawyers? Even then they can probably find one for a quick quote.
It's not like most journos have loads of money to spend on a story. If they are freelance then they can't even get the paper to pick up someone's lunch or taxi.

What user said. I’ve spent literally hours on the phone, explaining, guiding, referring to other relevant sources and people, only to find nary a thanks, acknowledgement, or link.

I do and will help when I can see they’ve read my work and are actually interested in what I have to say (even though that doesn’t guarantee acknowledgement either, though I’ve been known to blog post on the back of a national newspaper article that builds on my work, fair’s fair!)

I’m not expecting payment, just acknowledgement and a link to my research site. Not much to ask for my highly trained research services.

I get that journalists are not paid that much per article, particularly free lance.

But, again, I get asked many trivial questions that my children could answer by researching the internet i.e. the journalist is expecting me to do their work for free. Things like - which year did Einstein win a Nobel prize? who proved Fermat's Last Theorem? where is Andrew Wiles based these days?

And as pp wrote I do not always get credited properly in articles. When they do quote me, they also re-use the quotes in later articles (sometimes completely out of context) without informing me.

I’m not expecting payment, just acknowledgement

That's pretty easy to insist on!

I get asked many trivial questions that my children could answer by researching the internet

That's just silly, I agree that's the kind of thing that's easy for them to find out and you should be telling them that.
I've been on both sides of the interview and I have never asked or been asked daft questions like that.

Yeah...no one gets paid for talking to journalists. Unless its analysts making TV appearances.

But obviously they should do their research before interviewing.

Yeah...no one gets paid for talking to journalists. Unless its analysts making TV appearances.

I have, as an academic and research scientist, been on BBC radio/TV shows for nothing. Those who e.g. write popular science books get quite generous fees for the same shows. Is this reasonable? Genuine question here - I am of course paid by my university, but these shows involve work on top of my usual work. Shouldn't I be paid for it, if non-academics are paid?

You won't ever get paid for it, though, so you have the choice between publicising your research and getting kudos and more people interested in your work (including e.g. via Twitter and including other scientists) OR not publicising your research.

And some of those who write popular science books do it to publicise their books, rather than for pay. Plus if they are presenting a segment it's a lot more work than just appearing with a pre-interview.

I don't know about that, but I would be surprised if one guest on woman's hour for example gets paid and another doesn't.

The TV news channels I know of have a fairly fixed rate for analysts and journalist's appearances depending on the length of the segment. And they are on to comment on the topics of the day, rather than to publicise or comment on their own work.

And print journalists don't pay their interviewees (excluding show biz stuff) - it would be quite unethical if they did.

I do get paid sometimes by TV, worst. I have been paid ~1k for appearing in a TV show.

if one guest on woman's hour for example gets paid and another doesn't.

I actually know of a direct counter example to this. An academic colleague of mine was in a segment (unpaid) while a close friend of hers (non-academic, worked for charity) was paid.

New Scientist, Scientific American etc also all pay me.

user for writing for them or for being interviewed by a writer?

I thought New Scientist was mainly freelance writers so I'm assuming for writing for them?

(I have not stretched to such dizzy heights I'm afraid though. Breakfast & drivetime radio, tabloids/broadsheets/BBC Online or News 24, that kind of thing. Nobody's ever offered to pay me for 5 mins interview but equally when I was on the other end there was no money to be offered to academics for half an hour on the phone getting my thoughts about their article straight, either).

No, interviewed by them - for an article/book chapter based on my research.

(I should say that I am getting more prima donna like as I get older - and now questioning whether there is payment available, before agreeing to do things.)

Um. So how badly would it count against a candidate for a job if it turned out their fucking computer turned seven random letters in their nine-page CV into fucking Chinese ideograms?

Asking for a friend obviously.

Just seven letters? Not at a problem as far as I’m concerned.i take it doesn’t make it unreadable.

BBC never pay me even though I have done time consuming work for R3 and R4. I assume non scademics are paid. Annoying because I'd like to get some if my TV licence back as I never watch the box....

I think it is fine Gauche. Good luck! For your friend obviously!

As an aside, what is the largest number of journals you have approached and been rejected from before getting an article accepted? The third (my record) is about to desk reject and I am feeling a bit despondent. I will get it in but I can't change the sample (it's qual and I think the biggest issue). Agh. Give me some hope!

purple, um, something like 9? We're about to give up after #3 on a review paper, and I'm feeling like its a bit early, but I'm only a very small part of it, so barely put any effort in. If I'd written a lot more, I'd feel pretty annoyed at giving up so soon.

gauche - just 7 letters? yeah, that's small. It'll be fine.

And, my news... I FINALLY GOT FUNDING!!!! After slightly over 8-years with no luck, a proposal that I was co-I on got funded. Okay, so I'm only on it at 2% and form a small part of it, but at least I'm now counted as active on an actual funded project. It gives me hope that things might turn around, and other ones I'm waiting on or will soon submit might actually have a chance.

And, if anyone remembers me soul-searching about trying to move into an admin position last year, finally deciding to for it, and eventually not getting it, I'm doing the same thing again - this time for a bigger role. Except a lot less soul-searching. Like maybe a day instead of weeks. And this was even before I got the news about the funding. Although having gone through the investigation process before, I now know that I can shed departmental responsibilities and as it's a bigger role, I will be able to shed a lot of departmental admin and maybe even some teaching. It's also a formal application plus interview this time, whereas last time it was just an informal note of interest. I think Athena SWAN has something to do with this - I've never seen these admin roles advertised before a year a ago, and in the intervening year the one I applied for plus a good six others have been sent out to the whole Uni. Just seeing the adverts I think somehow makes me feel more confident - like I know I'm going not to be Dean or any of those super big ones, but just the thought that they're all up for grabs from among the faculty at large makes me feel more comfortable putting myself forward for the smaller roles within my research.

Anyway, so wish me luck or something... Again, I'm in the weird situation of wanting it (otherwise I wouldn't be applying) but also scared of being successful, because it would be a step into the unknown and maybe I should just stay in my departmental bubble where it's safe. Although obviously I've made the decision to risk it - and second time round it was a bit easier to take the risk. So feeling ambiguous but hopeful. And need to work on my application...

Murmaration congrats! Being funded makes you more findable for sure. And good luck with the application too.

!"I am not sure who gets paid by journalists for information. Maybe lawyers? Even then they can probably find one for a quick quote."

No not even us. In theory the publicity is sufficient. Very occasionally I have something like £50 for going on Sky news but bore no relationship to the time spent on the trip to the studio and back etc.

Congratulations on the funding

So who has seen #Timesupacademia on Twitter. Calling time on sexual harassment in the unis. There is a little thread on it in the Feminism chat section of MN. I thought it worth pointing up here. Interested to see where this goes.

I'm not convinced it will make much difference. The Guardian has been running stories on sexual harassment between university staff and students for a while now.

BTW, I think there are many horrible stories still not being told by female academics, for fear of their careers being affected. Stories that are very hard to tell, as the women involved often blame themselves.