This is a guest post from Dr Chris Smith of the Naked Scientists. Many of us doing scientific research at Cambridge University have appeared on his podcasts and radio shows. Now he needs our help …

The first time I set foot in Cambridge, I was 8 years old. I’d come with my family to buy a new computer – a BBC Micro – that everyone was raving about. I have a vivid memory of us all sitting in the car beside Parkers Piece as someone from the University strode past in a gown and mortar board. As we watched them pass, my Dad remarked, “get here, and you’re made for life.” 

He came from a working class family and had left school with one “O” Level. But, in the 1980s, a good brain, quick wits and a sense of humour meant that qualifications were not the obsessive gatekeepers that they are today, and he worked successfully as a London commodity broker, but could also confidently turn his hand to anything, including early home computers. I realise now that he was outstandingly bright, but also right. Because what he said to me that day never left me, and I worked tirelessly to get myself to Cambridge University so I could also change my life. And I did. 

Sadly, my Dad didn’t live long enough to see me get my A levels, complete a medical degree and a PhD at Cambridge, and then, later, work at my dream university as a clinician and a communicator of science. From that day on, every time I came to work, I would hear his voice in my head and feel deeply proud and grateful: I’m working at the world’s best university, loving it, and so proud to say so. 

But last month that voice fell silent. An email had landed just before the Bank Holiday weekend “inviting” me to join a formal consultation concerning my job, which is a post split between clinical medicine at Addenbrooke’s Hospital, where I am a consultant virologist, and the University of Cambridge, where I am ostensibly the “Public Understanding of Science Fellow”, a role that was set up for me in 2014 at the Institute of Continuing Education (ICE) to drive science outreach using the Naked Scientists

This is an award-winning science communication initiative I set up when I was a junior doctor and, in 2001 when I founded it, was one of the world’s first ever podcasts. It’s achieved over 150 million programme downloads since then, and remains one of the leading trusted sources for impartial coverage of science, technology and medicine information. 

Every week we produce several hours of novel content, going directly to the scientists behind some of the world’s most important discoveries. Yes we cover science from a range of sources, because balance matters, but Cambridge contributors are naturally extremely heavily represented in the outputs, which are all identified as coming from Cambridge University. 

There are also live radio programmes for the BBC including a regular 30m science phone-in for Jeremy Vine’s Radio 2 show, the weekly audience for which is 7 million. For BBC 5live I contribute “The Science Of…” on Tuesdays across lunchtimes with Naga Munchetty. This is a mix of longer format discussions with scientists working across the full spectrum of science, as well as quickfire science commentaries from me, summarising important findings. 

Over the pandemic the demand was naturally huge. I contributed over 2000 interviews to media internationally to help people to understand what was happening and why. Days were routinely 15 hours long, and it was 7 days a week. But it was worth it, because we put Cambridge loudly on the map, and listeners and viewers still write to me today to say that they found those broadcasts reassuring and helpful.

So it was a total hammerblow, just a short while after that Herculaen pandemic effort, and off the back of a strong track record for many years, to be informed that, on the grounds of cost savings and the fact that my outreach isn’t aligned with the strategic outreach direction of my department, my post is being made redundant.

Even worse, as it stands currently, because the University is my employer I also lose my consultant post at Addenbrooke’s Hospital, despite an excellent track record there too. And although there is a desire to retain my clinical expertise at the Hospital, the speed at which this is all being inflicted makes it impossible to move sufficiently quickly to set things up in time, so the clinical service will also, I’m told, be impacted.

I suspect, and others have said as much to me, that the people behind this decision to end my relationship with Cambridge University are not actually aware of the impact that I have. There is no mechanism to capture objectively the effect of the work that I do. 

Exercises like the RAE and REF are publication-led; researchers list their outputs and then highlight their public engagement activities that stem from these. Yet while that cited activity reflects well on the researchers, any involvement I have had will not be recognised by this system. Hence I am largely invisible and appear to make no contribution, despite helping that researcher reach an audience of hundreds of thousands in some cases.

No other university in the world has an operation like the Naked Scientists. It’s been hugely successful as a vehicle to carry and reinforce the Cambridge brand to wider audiences worldwide. And it’s clear from the hundreds of communications sent to me in the wake of this current situation that there are many people who have heard our message over the years and have come to Cambridge, like me all those years ago, to change their lives. I’m so pleased; in fact, some the letters that have arrived have almost moved me to tears. And if they read them, the officers of the University cannot fail to see that their support for my post hitherto has touched huge numbers of people around the world and reflected very positively on the reputation of the University. 

So come on Cambridge. Archimedes might have been the original Naked Scientist, but you’re really throwing out the baby with the bath water. Please meet with me, let’s turn this around, and let’s continue to work together as the strong team we are. 

Categories: Blog

6 Comments

Bleak · 18 June 2025 at 09:14

Very bad news

An example of excellence being sacrificed without understanding. By administrators

    21percent.org · 18 June 2025 at 09:39

    Please contact Dr Chris Smith (his CRSID is cs222) if you wish to offer support.

    Chris has an email list of people in Cambridge University whom you can contact if you would like to see this decision reversed.

DmitriIvanovsky · 20 June 2025 at 06:56

And here

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz9kpx70p7xo

Eileen Nugent · 2 July 2025 at 11:39

Chris Smith, I find it hard to believe that you are losing your position in both the university and the hospital & in such a disorderly way that is not only disrupting your own life but also the functioning of a local hospital/global medical centre and its capacity to care for patients at a time when it is already under severe pressure with staff cuts and hiring freezes for different staff groups.

Having worked on REF impact cases I can attest to problems with university measurement of impact for individual staff members. These problems were clear when writing up an impact case for the late Sir David Mackay. David wrote sustainable energy without the hot air, a book which was used by the UK government as a blueprint to drive decarbonisation of the national grid. There was debate over whether the book could be counted as a research output because it did not sit neatly into any particular category of research output as it was a book that was clearly written and accessible to a very wide audience & if it was a research output whether impact could be linked to it or whether the clear information itself was the impact & how to define that impact. Surprising amounts of irrational thinking had to be broken down to prevent an exceptionally strong impact case from being unnecessarily discarded and ensure Cambridge clearly & accurately communicated the exceptional depth of impact members of its community were having on society. Aside from the financial impact of a sub-optimal REF impact submission I think by far greater impact is the impact on the academic community in Cambridge.

David McKay is an individual who would inspire people to come to Cambridge & to follow in his path of engaging in the exceptional amounts of deep academic learning that are necessary to find out precisely how to solve a difficult, complex & pressing problem that is critical to society in a way which is likely to deliver the most accurate solution possible. That inspiration relies on his story being told, on their being individuals such as yourself in the Cambridge community to tell his story & the many other Cambridge stories like it, on there being a sub-community of academic community growers. When stories of genuine societal impact being made by those who also genuinely care for their co-workers are accurately communicated, more people start to believe that it is possible to live a good life whilst also working towards continuously improving the lives of others in society & more people then start to show up to see if they can join in & turn that belief into a proven fact.

Leave a Reply

Avatar placeholder

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *