Academic hits out at own university over its pro-Voice branding but they say if you don’t like it you can ‘unfollow’ them

exclusive

An outspoken academic has slammed her university for using its social media accounts and job listings to ‘virtue signal’ in support of a Yes vote – but the institution says people can like it or not do it.

The University of New South Wales Sydney (UNSW) has placed a yellow graphic on its social media and LinkedIn profiles featuring the words “UNSW Says Yes” in a yellow circle around a red love heart with indigenous motifs.

UNSW Economics Professor Gigi Foster says the blatant patronage is inappropriate for a publicly funded body that should stay away from political activism.

However, the university defended the brand, which was designed by UNSW Fine Arts student and Wiradjuri wife Lua Pellegrini, as ‘consistent with (its) values’ and even suggested those who don’t like it should scrap it those.

The artwork appears on the university’s Facebook page alongside a boast that UNSW ‘proudly supports the First Nations Voice in Parliament’.

The image ‘depicts coming together to discuss The Voice and highlights the vibrancy and diversity of community and perspective,’ the site says.

The UNSW spokesperson said the decision to brand social media and other messages “was made after significant consultation, which included the University’s Indigenous leadership”.

She noted that UNSW has previously ‘co-opted’ her social media profile image for causes such as NAIDOC Week and Sydney Mardi Gras.

“Profile pictures are temporary and will return after the referendum,” the spokesperson said.

“LinkedIn followers and users who feel strongly about any temporary changes are welcome to cancel or temporarily disconnect the UNSW page from their profile.”

However, Professor Foster told Daily Mail Australia that she did not ‘think it was the place of any publicly funded institution to take positions on political issues’.

“The university has an obligation to promote an environment so that people don’t feel compelled ideologically because of the university’s affiliation with a particular political position,” she said.

“Universities are supposed to be the places, if there are any places left, in civil society where different potential positions, philosophical positions, policy positions can be freely explored.

“When there is advocacy for a particular political position, or political party for that matter, it undermines providing that kind of environment for staff and students and even alumni.”

Professor Foster said that by branding job adverts with a pro-Voice message, the university’s stance could deter potential applicants.

“It’s worrying that this advocacy is showing up in university recruitment messages because if I were an applicant I would see it and think, ‘Well, I think you might just have some beliefs to work at UNSW,'” she said.

“It’s a cold shower for people looking for an open, critical and inquisitive environment to implicitly communicate, even before they start work, that a particular belief they may hold is not welcome.

“I would really hope that’s not true of any university.”

The UNSW spokesman denied that delaying the Yes vote would alienate staff and students with a different view.

“UNSW is wholeheartedly committed to free speech and our position on this matter does not compel any member of our community to vote one way or the other,” the spokesman said.

Professor Foster accused universities of indulging in ‘virtue signalling’ by supporting the Yes campaign.

She pointed to the Canadian parliament giving a standing ovation to 98-year-old former Ukrainian soldier Yaroslav Hunka as an example of how this can backfire.

Canadian MPs were left red-faced when it was revealed that Hunka had served in the Waffen-SS, an elite Nazi force that committed numerous World War II atrocities.

“This kind of colossal blunder is emblematic of the consequences when we start virtue signaling without acting virtuously,” Professor Foster said.

“Voting yes on Voice is being promoted as the thing to do if you care about Aboriginal people and if you care about giving people a voice and all these kinds of positive, non-arguable objectives,” she said.

“But this is only a surface-level association expected by some people who may not think too deeply about what is being proposed, but it is certainly not the only way to see a ‘Yes’ vote in the referendum.” voice”.

Defending the brand, a UNSW spokesperson told Daily Mail Australia “The heartfelt Uluru Statement and its call for a First Nations Voice in Parliament aligns with UNSW’s values ​​of inclusion and respect”.

“We are delighted to have the opportunity to reinforce our ongoing commitment to a just society,” the spokesperson said.

They said the university “has supported the Voice from the early days, through the Uluru Center for Indigenous Law and Dialogues, and UNSW academics have advised the government on the wording of the Voice referendum”.

Sound architect Megan Davis is a professor of law at the university and holds the position of Indigenous Pro Vice-Chancellor.

In August, UNSW lit up and decorated a library building to display the colors of the Indigenous flag with a large ‘Yes’ etched into the structure.

Professor Foster dismissed the claim that supporting the Voice should be an expression of UNSW’s values.

“There are some faith groups that I would argue that the university should support – certainly a belief in tolerance is very, very positive to hear for the university,” she said.

“There are many things to stand for that would show its (UNSW) values, but I don’t think advocating for a particular political position is in that mix.

“Not all Indigenous people are planning to vote ‘Yes’.

“The whole notion that you can group Indigenous people into a bloc and know how they’re going to vote is a bit disrespectful.”