The Halo Effect academics have

I think the biggest mistake academics and 'professional' people make is they over-estimate the power of traditional media and 'spreading the word'. The other talk I had attended attracted more people than the room could fit - PAYING PARTICIPANTS. They didn't even bother with traditional media. They didn't even INVITE THE PRESS. (Well, not only did I take no-pay-self-approved-leave, I paid for my bus-ride to KL and my taxi-fare to the place in Kota Kemuning, I paid RM30 for some refreshments and 2 hours of attending a lecture I would otherwise not be able to afford.)In exchange for transport to the bus-stop, I asked if they would allow me to do a write-up to share with other people who could not attend that day. My article is on their website. And no, they did not pay me a single cent.

Spreading the word alone doesn't work if the word gets to just 'anyone'....the message has to reach a specific demographic, a specific 'micro-demographic', actually. It is this 1% who will MOVE the idea into ACTION and produce RESULTS. For instance, my friend's mom asked me to 'spread the word' about her husband's book. I'm not the correct person to target because the people in my life, almost exclusively, are Chinese-educated, working class folk or housewives without advanced degrees. That was 60sen worth of adex gone the wrong way.

The issue of why events and information in the hands of academics never arrive in our hands had been on my mind for years. During the time when I entered the first Chinese-ed team for the Young Scientist competition organized annually by Seameo-RECSAM, I had already noticed something like this happening. It was also then that I realized that funding is allocated to academics based on who they know where; after that's been decided, talks are organized by sending out invitations to people they know. If you're not an academic, you'd be hard pressed to get invited.

I can imagine that academics may worry about obtaining sponsorship or funding or getting enough paid participants to attend the workshops/talk they want to give. Air-tickets/bus-rides/hotel stays and paid-leave don't pay themselves. I understand that when I attend training and workshops where I have to absorb all that cost myself. If I were not self-employed, I would have to depend on the generosity and understanding of my employer to approve my paid-leave and also to reimburse my expenditure. But I also have a feeling that, costs being covered aside, academics do wish they can share more of what they know to the people who have the will, capacity and resources to mobilize theory into actionable plans.

But that's just me and how I feel. I feel information between researches/leaders should be disseminated much more efficiently and effectively than is happening at the moment. I cannot get over the feeling that I get queried each time I invite myself to a public event in an academic setting and I'm not referring specifically to the one I attended recently. I've always had the impression that these events were meant as a gateway for the public to have awareness and be in tandem with the goings-on in research and development funded by, one way or another, public dollars either in the form of tuition fees or government funding. The public has a right to access these events and ask questions without being queried about our motives. It is for us these talks are being held, or am I wrong? So far I have believed that talks are meant for information dissemination, not a public display of vanity and intellectualism.

I don't have to represent 'the press' or any body, organization, group...to ask questions about the objectives, reach and tracking of impact of each event. In fact, I don't even think anyone except the Public is capable of asking the most pressing questions and wanting answers which can be measured and accounted for. I am Joe ...err Jane Public and I have a right to keep myself informed if the announcement says "FREE" or "PAID". If they want to doubt the people who are not in their inner-circle who attend and want to be an engaged and involved citizen, they should then have closed talks. If they discourage Average Joe from being curious and are unaware of how their questioning causes intimidation, I don't see how the public is going to continue depending on academia for answers.

It's a good thing I don't get intimidated at all in virtually any situation in life, but then I put myself in the shoes of other ordinary people like me and can imagine how they WOULD get intimidated. The only thing that makes me 'extra'ordinary is the fact that I engage myself in issues every other ordinary folk needs answers to. For instance, people complain about the increasing population of stray animals......I visit the local SPCA, listen to them, see what I can do; visit the Director General of Vet Services, listen to him and suggest projects which require community-involvement. I have no specific agenda in anything I do - I'm just involved and engaged because I'm the average citizen. I just gather information and I have a right to be a Gatherer even if we've evolved past the Hunter-Gatherer phase of human evolution.