The New York Times has a disturbing article today about secret funds given to researchers by Big Tobacco with lots of strings attached. The whole article is worth a read, but this little paragraph makes it absolutely clear why tenure and academic freedom are not trivial things:
A tenured scientist at Virginia Commonwealth, who would not be interviewed for attribution because he said he feared retribution against his junior colleagues, called the contract's restrictions, especially the limitations on publication, "completely unacceptable in the research world."
I guarantee junior, untenured faculty, even if they're disgusted, are keeping their mouths shut. This is why tenure is so important. Without it, there's no way to call out those who can fire you.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Chad got to this first (cursed time zones), but I want to say a bit about the Inside Higher Ed article on the tumult in the Philosophy Department at the College of William & Mary that concerns, at least in part, how involved junior faculty should be in major departmental decisions:
Should…
Timothy Burke has a typically excellent post about the problems with academic tenure. Not the usual "It's an abomination that prevents that Magic Power of the Market from working its wonders" complaint from outside, but problems from the academic side:
Oso Raro and Tenured Radical underline one of…
The London School of Economics has a report on a study of academic refereeing (PDF) that looked at the effect of incentives on referee behavior. They found that both a "social incentive" (posting the time a given referee took to turn around the papers they reviewed on a web site) and a cash…
@EricRWeinstein is at it again in twitterland, this time on the subject of the funding of science. For an intriguing read about the glut of Ph.D.s versus science funding, he links to his (circa 1998?) article titled: "How and Why Government, Universities, and Industry Create Domestic Labor…
There are two components to that story. One is the fear on the part of the young untenured faculty. The other is the responsibility of senior tenured faculty to protect and/or speak for them, as apparently one is doing, though it's sad that he/she wants to be unidentified for fear of reprisals against untenured colleagues.
Are we entirely certain that the junior faculty under discussion are not those who felt it necessary to take the BigTobaccy money? And that it is the sort of critique levied against Edyth London from which they need to be protected?
DM,
From the context of the article, the faculty member is concerned that the administration will seek reprisals against junior faculty associated with criticism of this funding.