This has been a problem for far too long now. I remember 15 years ago, maybe more(?) complaining about having my ideas used (or ignored) then celebs fronting programmes, campaigns and advice columns. So many people have missed opportunities, so much poor coverage as a result
Here I am back in 2004 complaining about celebrities fronting campaigns. Honestly, I bore myself with all this and absolutely nothing changes google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theg…
There’s a lot that’s changed since 2004. I’d definitely write that piece differently now. One thing that hasn’t altered is the use of celebs to front stories or programmes. Being famous (even if you’re qualified in a particular area) doesn’t mean you’re an expert on everything
I hope it helps to put out there this isn’t a new problem, nor is it something that hasn’t been contested. It helps to track poor practice over time. This includes how racism within the media (especially among editors, producers and commissioners) shapes coverage and causes harm.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Last year I was on a panel with colleagues discussing EDI issues with senior academics and funding body reps. It was the most personal speech I've ever given and afterwards several audience members said they'd contact me so we could focus on change. What do you think happened?
You would be correct if you guessed:
- nobody contacted me as promised
- no, not even the ones whose details I'd asked for who I messaged and asked if they wanted to move things forward as they'd pledged.
Here's the details of the event page.exlibrisgroup.com/research-profe… which was excellent (and not just because of our panel😄 the whole day was really interesting and useful). I left with high hopes I'd got people who I'd been trying to reach for years in a room to listen and act. I failed.
It's not even midday on Monday and I've had seven requests for free work already this morning.
People, please stop this. If you want training, articles written or other consultancy work (that includes 'can I pick your brain over a coffee?') you need to budget and pay for it.
As you know I already create *lots* of free resources and I am happy to do voluntary work of my choosing for those most in need.
If your platform/organisation is some kind of big deal that I should be grateful to appear on then it can pay me, can't it?
Also telling me that I'd get 'experience' or 'exposure' from working for free for your organisation tells me you've not researched me at all 😂 and you don't care about those who are early in their careers either. Wherever we are in our careers, payment is needed.
I'm always looking for resources to recommend and currently I'm working through books on listening/communication skills. All of them continually emphasise how 'good' or 'active' listening is demonstrated by sitting quietly (not moving around/hands still) and sustained eye contact
I don't find this helpful. When people share problems some might want to sit still and look at you (and have you return that gaze) but in my experience people don't want this at all. They like to move around, to lie still under a blanket, to turn their back or hide their face
It's why talking during a walk; a car drive; while making a meal, washing up or crafting; or meeting up somewhere for a coffee can be helpful - you get places for pauses, distractions, movement, tension de-escalation. It's also why people prefer to chat via email, text or phone
This exchange needs studying with care. “Mental health” is being framed in a very specific way with a clear intention. Look for the buzzwords of resilience and positivity and being mentally well so you can contribute to a better future. Who is brought in and left out by this?
As with my comments yesterday about enforcing “wellness” while ignoring structural harms and causes of distress, the framing of “mental health” as something positive we should all have in the future without attending to who and what is making us unwell *now* is concerning.
The logical endpoints of these messages are that mental health is a good thing we all have and should strive for with grit and gumption and if we don’t have it it’ll be due to not trying hard enough rather than circumstances, life events, social factors and political decisions.
Today's #ResearchTip is about responding to evaluations/criticisms. These may be something formal (part of career progression, or at the close of an event) or informal (a passing comment) and may be solicited (you ask for feedback) or unsolicited (you didn't ask for it) /1
Where possible give yourself time to process feedback. If you're lucky it can be positive, affirming etc. Sometimes it can be tough. And if you're in a bad place even nice feedback/helpful evaluations may not feel like it. So, make some space and prepare yourself first /2
I find taking notes as I go through feedback helps me focus and be less anxious. (Also saves time if you're going to respond). I use a 5 column table:
each piece of feedback/evaluation
what's good/useful
what's negative
what's misguided/irrelevant
what I'm going to do next /3
I've had lots of folk get in touch worried about mandatory wellbeing activities in schools, colleges and unis.
To clarify,pushing people to do wellbeing activities as decided by an employer/educator is wrong.
As are hosting wellbeing activities without changing underlying harms
If you want to offer wellbeing activities these should only be after you attend to any causes of distress and:
- delivered at the request of others
- be varied, accessible and optional
- allow people to choose their own activities (including doing absolutely nothing if desired)
Pushing people to 'be well', including digital surveillance that wellbeing activities have been completed, will not help anyone.
Also mindfulness is not synonymous with wellbeing and may be unpleasant or harmful for some people, so should not be set as a compulsory standard.