Welcome to The Creative Knowledge Exchange How can academics more creatively translate their work to effectively engage audiences outside of academia? It’s about creative innovation in knowledge exchange. Community building. And cultural transformation. Why do so few academics create content, like YouTube videos? You might think the answer is obvious: ‘time and money’. But that’s not it. How can we support academics to creatively translate their work? To engage diverse audiences, and to scale their research impact. Universities offer media training and facilitate the technical production of podcasts and videos. This results in little more than impact theatre. We’ll examine why. And what is the value of creative innovation in knowledge exchange, not just for academics themselves but for universities? It’s about the collective spirit. And the very future of academia. This series is going to answer these questions, and more. It will explore untapped potential; and innovation in creative knowledge exchange. How it can energise the academic community to engage society, to rebuild trust and to scale research impact But first, we must consider the urgent imperative that drives this work. United States Vice President J.D. Vance declared universities are the enemy. These fiery declarations are often brushed off as baseless culture war provocation. But this sentiment has permeated beyond the anti-intellectual extremes. Australian research is considered world class by every academic measure but isn’t seen to be addressing the needs of society. And, as a result, Australians’ trust in universities continues to decline. According to research lead by former Deakin University Vice-Chancellor Professor Iain Martin, 31% of Australians don ’t trust our universities very much; only 15% do. According to Emeritus Professor Graeme Turner, Australian universities have failed to connect their value with society or industry and government with sufficient force to shift the negative attitudes held against them. On this deepening rift, trust and the idea of a ‘social license to operate’ the consensus among university leadership seems clear: universities must return to purpose. The rift, and negative public perception, I argue, is largely a consequence of universities ineffectiveness at connecting their research—knowledge, ideas and solutions—its relevance, value and potential for impact with the communities they were established to serve. To pose the provocation of Murphy and Costa: “what is the role of the university when it comes to sustaining and enriching a broader intellectual culture in the public sphere?” According to Dr Ryan Young, “Today we live in a world of information and knowledge abundance”. Universities’ unwillingness or inability to connect knowledge with society has resulted in a vacuum, now centre stage for spectacle, corporate and big business interests, creators and influencers, conspiracy theories and mis and disinformation. In this new knowledge landscape, we must reassert academics’ positions as platformed public intellectuals. To re-engage audiences in academia. In this context the utility of creative knowledge exchange isn’t understood, acknowledged or incentivised. Academics aren’t encouraged or supported to embrace emergent modes of engagement to connect their knowledge, ideas and solutions with diverse audiences beyond their peers. These audiences have proven to engage with the very thing academics produce. Knowledge. But this want is satiated on platforms like YouTube and TikTok by creators that cultivate loyal communities of interest. To illustrate the untapped potential at the centre of this, Melbourne Business School has a YouTube channel with 3400 subscribers and has received a total of 1,800,000 views. In comparison, Australia’s leading finance and investment YouTube channel New Money has well over 1,000,000 subscribers and has received over 100,000,000 views. Melbourne Business School is undoubtably home to some of the brightest minds in the country when it comes to business, finance and investment. New Money was founded by a physiotherapist turned amateur investor and YouTuber. Universities have a wealth of expertise. But their exposure, and engagement, is virtually non-existent when compared to popular content creators whose influence vastly eclipses any evident expertise. The real-world impact of this tension has been made painfully clear. Throughout 2024 and 2025 36 Months, an organisation formed by a commercial radio presenter and the owner of an advertising agency and production company, lobbied for a teen social media ban in Australia. 36 Months featured heavily in the popular media; partnered with major national and multinational brands; produced award-winning advertising campaigns; created content and garnered public support via social media. These strategies proved incredibly effective. The teen social media ban has now taken effect. The organisation’s co-founders appear to have no expertise in either social media use or youth mental health. There is no evidence in support of their qualifications to lead such a campaign. And while their motivations are presented as good intentioned, who’s knows? In what appears to be a perverse inversion, academics possess the evidence and nuanced understanding of social media use and youth mental health. But lacked the force for their research to have impact. Opposing the teen social media ban, Australia’s leading experts wrote evidence-based explainers; featured in the media across opinion articles, news commentary and interviews; wrote articles for The Conversation; produced their own podcasts; signed open letters; and submitted lengthy policy submissions. Simply put, non-academic influencers are playing an entirely different game. Academic research should be innovative by design. But when it comes to the dissemination of research, innovation has not yet occurred. At least not at the required scale to shift negative public perceptions. Returning to the proclamation of J.D. Vance—that universities are the enemy—it cannot be taken lightly. However, according to Professor Alan Jagolinzer, statements like this are proof of academics’ impact: figures of power would not threaten academics if their work didn’t matter. In the face of such attacks Jagolinzer calls for urgency. And courage. For academics to utilise every mode available, including video, to communicate their work; to become influencers themselves. The academic community must be empowered, to become a bold and powerful collective force. These are not times to shy away, but to reassert academics’ positions; to regain authority and earn back publics’ trust. Still, academics struggle to connect their work with audiences beyond their peers as they work against both institutional systems and conservative cultures; and compete for attention with both established and emerging knowledge creators and influencers. Returning to the overarching question: how can academics more creatively translate their work to effectively engage non-academic audiences? It was quickly determined that it’s not as simple as making better research videos. More of them. Or tapping into fads and memes. Entertaining, effective and engaging research videos and podcasts are plentiful. We already knew creative content could be great for knowledge exchange. What we didn’t know was why so few academics make creative content. What’s holding them back, besides the obvious of time and money? Because it’s more complicated than that. Professor James Ker-Lindsay believes online video is the “ultimate form of public engagement in the modern era”. He saw a change in his students—they weren’t reading as much—so he adapted his method of delivery to suit students’ evolving relationship with education. He became a content creator, and now, he has over 320,000 YouTube subscribers. Still, Ker-Lindsay is an outlier. Very few academics successfully engage audiences in these spaces. Deeply entrenched barriers remain between academics and creative modes of knowledge exchange. Creative content isn’t acknowledged or incentivised. It’s actively dissuaded. The pressure to publish or perish remains very real. And the pursuit of prestige metrics can be all consuming. Professor Carl Rhodes states, on the pursuit of publication in elite journals: “alone, it just makes the work pretty futile”. But, unfortunately, the road to promotion is paved with publications (and grant success). Not public scholarship. But, to quote Dr Hossai Gul: People forget that our papers are documentation of knowledge, it’s nothing else. And what you need to do for dissemination and translation is quite different. When academics want to translate their work creatively it’s usually up to them. Generally, academics don’t possess the breadth of skills required to conduct high level research, and to effectively connect this research with diverse audiences. Institutions aren’t providing the culture, support and resources academics need. Universities do provide some training and support to produce research content. However, available support is typically technical: How to make videos with your phone or how to use editing software. But while the technical side of content creation has never been easier. Crafting compelling narratives that resonate with audiences has never been harder. Providing technical support disregarding the holistic aspects of successful content, you end up with academic podcasts and videos that fail to reach the engagement potential of their subject matter. Envisioning new ways to bring knowledge to life, academics want to partner with creatives to frame and package their research. To develop innovative engagement strategies that connect narratives with their intended audiences. And to create content that responds to contemporary tastes and culture and exceeds expectations. Bas
