Sir, – Tony Forde (July 18th) queries the use by academic staff of their institutional affiliation, drawing a contrast with practices in the private companies and other public-sector organisations.
Whatever the position with regard to staff employed in public or private organisations, the case of academics is different. It is entirely appropriate that academics bring their knowledge and expertise to matters of public interest. In this context, they participate in public debate in their capacity as academics rather than as private citizens; hence the relevance of identifying their institutional affiliation.
It is well understood in the university world that the views of an individual academic should not be attributed to the institution that employs him or her. Universities also understand the importance of questioning received wisdom, and of stating controversial and unpopular opinions. It is a vitally important contribution that universities and their academic staff make to society. This entitlement is rooted in the principle of academic freedom, which is protected by the Universities Act 1997 and applies to “teaching, research and any other activities either in or outside the university”. – Yours, etc,
Prof PAUL McCUTCHEON,
Vice President,
Academic and Registrar,
University of Limerick.
Sir, – If nothing else, letters from academics holding wildly divergent views on the same topic show that the truth is seldom as plain and unvarnished as we may wish it to be. – Yours, etc,
PATRICIA O’RIORDAN,
Dublin 8.
Sir, – There are several possible responses to Tony Forde’s complaint about academics using their work addresses when they write to the newspapers, but the main one is that it is not obvious that the public interest would be best served if they were to use their private address, in particular when they write about something like third-level funding.
As a former academic who has written to The Irish Times occasionally, I have always used my home address even when writing about third-level funding, a matter which affected me personally as well as my former employer (Trinity College Dublin). However, I have always wondered when doing this whether it was right not to make it clear to readers that I had a personal interest in (and knowledge of) what I was writing about by including my affiliation.
The answer to that question is not cut and dried.
It is worth noting that some papers (including the Financial Times) often add a correspondent's affiliation, even if the correspondents do not add it themselves, so that readers will know who is writing. Finally, maybe I am a more avid reader of the Letters page than Mr Forde is, but I can recall numerous instances over the years of private-sector correspondents using their work address. – Yours, etc,
FRANK E BANNISTER,
Dublin 4.