University investigating marketing academic for blog criticism

Lecturer says it is ‘outrageous’ that he is under investigation for saying most institutional advertising is ‘pointless’

Published on
October 22, 2026
Last updated
October 23, 2026
Source: Getty / roman023
Free Speech

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”.

ADVERTISEMENT

The blogpost, titled “Why are universities so bad at marketing?” and 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.

ADVERTISEMENT

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.

ADVERTISEMENT

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”.

ADVERTISEMENT

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.

ADVERTISEMENT

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

frances.jones@timeshighereducation.com

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.

Related articles

Reader's comments (13)

Lancaster approach to the hole they are in is to dig deeper
Gosh - so clear that the U risks being in breach of the academic freedom and academic free speech protections of the 2023 legislation and falling foul of OfS enforcement; it is no justification that this bod’s assessment of Us’ marketing generally (as something falling squarely within his academic expertise) might have upset/annoyed/irritated his own U’s marketing team. All very silly of Lancaster’s Management.
This whole episode is bad marketing for the university. Most people would never have heard of the blog but many more have seen the university's reaction. Maybe marketers have a word for this? Where a company's reaction to an event causes far greater reputation loss than the event itself?
Maybe not in university/corporate context, but it is generally called the Barbara Streisand effect. In any case he is not part of the decision chain of the marketing department. And a departement getting criticism is fair game. It may be unpleasant for the recipients, but that is what it means to be a professional.
I’m with you Mike, and I’m so tired of crappy central teams complaining about their feelings. Most of their marketing is rubbish and would fail a basic 101 module, yet the spend vast sums and are never held accountable to even basic measures of marketing effectiveness. Deans head must roll when you win.
They could actually start by understanding the product (the course), the demand, and the impact of getting students primarily attracted by the quality of the local nightlife
I would go further on diving into the life of the university and the product. I've seen very good central marketers spend a lot of time immersing themselves in the university's history, its lived heritage, and its day to day rituals as well as working directly with academics. These to me are fundamentals of authenticity. But unfortunately many uni marketing teams are transient largely due to poor pay and frustrating conditions and a culture in marketing of switching jobs. The local nightlife issue to me is very old fashioned, UCAS data breaks down how students want hear about place and its primarily about jobs, internships, university connections and so on. Promoting expensive degrees on the basis of leisure has failed, it's a wonder why any marketing Department keeps doing it.
I sympathize with this, but he is an employee publicly criticizing his employer's strategy. While I am sure he is probably right, I think most most employers would take a dim view of one of their employees publcly criticising another of their unit's work in this way. If a manager at M&S, for example, openly slags off their marketing strategy and dept online what would their view be? I don't think this really is a free speech issue to be honest, it's not a serious whistle-blowing activity exposing serious malpractice or anything like that. On the whole employers expect their employees to use discretion when publicly discussing their employment. Whether the University were wise in pursuing this is another matter, but maybe there's more to this than is apparent?
We are not M&S. We do not sell socks. We sell wisdom, dispassionate analysis of data and considered opinions. One of the principal reasons we are in a pickle is that university managements, governments, and you think that what is approriate for M&S should be identical for a university.
And that academic staff is interchangeable, just like m&s shelf stackers. The criticism is mostly about wasted open day notifications based on a lack of appreciation of intended result and the audience it is hoped will cause the result.
Having read the blog, it is pretty mild stuff, and it seems to make sense, so the mature and academic reply would be...point taken, or, on the opposite, argue agaunst the argument of the blog, asking the blog to include a reply...saying, for example, it is important to think ahead when you are a fresher, and adding data showing that freshers already think about postgraduate studies...let the readers then decide...but we are in the age of complaints, and with the presumption of guilt, because the very process of assessing complaints is punishment regadless of the outcome, and with basically no consequences for the accuser if they weaponise the system.
.
Keep it up Mike, it takes b**cks to speak up. Lan U is digging itself into a bigger hole than already is, great job senior management!!

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT