University investigating marketing academic for blog criticism

An academic who criticised universities’ marketing efforts as “bad” is under investigation by his institution after fellow staff members raised complaints.

Lancaster University has launched an “independent investigation into concerns and complaints” levied against its lecturer, Mike Ryder, who specialises in marketing.

It relates to a blog and related YouTube video posted by Ryder which said many universities – including his own – engage in “pointless” marketing techniques.

An email sent to Ryder by the university, seen by Times Higher Education, said the probe relates “primarily to comments made about the performance of the University’s Marketing and Recruitment teams and the potential impact that these comments have had on colleagues”.

The blogpost – titled Why are universities so bad at marketing? – posted on Ryder’s personal website on 10 October, criticises his university for using “absurd advertising” to attract students but stresses that “this isn’t a problem limited to one single university”.

Speaking to THE, Ryder called the university’s decision “absolutely outrageous” and said it infringed upon his academic freedom. “To be put under suspicion for basically calling a spade a spade and just talking about marketing, which is my job and something, I hope… I am very good at, is absolutely insane,” he said.

Ryder said he had been working in various marketing and communication industry roles for 10 years until, in 2016, he left to complete a PhD in English and Creative Writing at Lancaster and has stayed in academia since.

He told THE: “We can all criticise marketing because we can all see it. And let us not forget, it’s my job to teach people stuff. And it’s an instructive case as much as anything.”

He added that he was “surprised” by the call from his dean particularly “given the problems that we have in higher education, and indeed within my own department”.

Ryder has since been informed that posts he made about the investigation on social media will also be considered during the process.

The Committee for Academic Freedom (CAF), which describes itself as a “non-partisan group dedicated to defending academic freedom in the UK”, has since contacted Ryder to offer support.

Posting on X, CAF said “If an academic is being formally investigated simply for publishing a blog criticising university marketing practices, this raises serious questions about the university’s compliance with its statutory free-speech duties.

“Dr Ryder’s own specialism is marketing, making the reported grounds for investigating his blog about university marketing strategies all the more extraordinary,” it said.

CAF cited the Office for Students’ regulatory guidance on freedom of speech, which says that “every complaints process should promptly reject vexatious, frivolous or obviously unmeritorious complaints relating to speech”.

The organisation warned that “if the facts are as reported, and this investigation is not promptly brought to an end, there may be grounds for a formal grievance and, potentially, a complaint to the OfS under its new free-speech complaints scheme.

A Lancaster spokesperson said it was “fully committed to protecting the free exchange of ideas and opinion on our campus and recognises the fundamental importance of academic freedom and freedom of speech”.

“At the same time, we are mindful of our duty of care to the wider university community. Following complaints from a number of staff about comments made in the public domain and their compliance with standards as well as the potential personal impact on colleagues we took the decision to start an independent investigation.

“This is a recognised process to help establish the facts and ensure a matter is considered fairly. We have made clear that any such investigation will consider academic freedom and freedom of speech.

“As this is a confidential process, we are unable to comment further on the specific circumstances.”

frances.jones@timeshighereducation.com