Featured Post from ExpertFile

A Bumpy Ride Ahead for HigherEd

However Comms Pros are uniquely positioned to help institutions

Mar 27, 2025

7 min

Peter Evans
CaptionResizeWrap TextRemove


A confluence of political, economic, and social challenges is threatening the very fabric of US universities.  In both red and blue states, the political and economic headwinds facing institutions are fierce, public skepticism is high, and social media has become a polarizing battleground of filter bubbles filled with mis/disinformation. Universities find themselves squeezed by funding cuts, scrutinized by lawmakers, and caught in cultural crossfire.


This presents a unique challenge for communications professionals. In this era of declining trust and “alternative facts,” they need to be hyper-informed, adapt quickly, and boldly emphasize the critical value institutions have in society. Communications should function as a vital link, bridging this growing divide between town and gown.


In red and blue states, the political and economic headwinds hitting higher education are fierce, public skepticism is high, and social media has become a polarizing battleground of filter bubbles filled with mis/disinformation.


It's important to note that throughout history, universities often emerge stronger and more deeply connected to the public during times of turbulence. Universities played a key role in partnering with the government to implement Roosevelt's New Deal, helping with emergency relief and agricultural programs. They helped democratize education with the GI Bill after World War II. They responded to societal demands during the civil rights era. Most recently, they played a key role in public health amidst the COVID-19 pandemic.


Campus communicators have a unique set of skills and a vital responsibility to steer their institutions through these tough times. But the road ahead will be hard.


The New Reality for Campus Communicators


Cuts to Research Funding

The lifeblood of academic innovation—research dollars—is under threat. The new political regime in Washington is looking to cut billions in federal research funding. A sudden cap on NIH indirect costs (slashed to 15% from an average of 28%) will have a profound impact on programs. Many researchers report that major grants are frozen or are expected to shrink. This “budget axe” isn’t theoretical for research universities—it’s biting right now.


Communicators must convey what’s at stake: essential contributions such as groundbreaking science, community health programs, and innovation pipelines that fuel the economy hang in the balance as money gets tighter.


Increasing State Oversight & Regulation

In state capitals, politicians are muscling into campus affairs like never before. Republican-controlled statehouses are overhauling higher education governance, introducing over 150 bills in 35 states aimed at tightening control over public institutions. Even tenure is threatened. In the past year, lawmakers in seven states moved to eliminate or curb tenure and impose stricter post-tenure reviews – an unprecedented encroachment on academic freedom. New laws and proposals are creating oversight committees, mandating changes to the curriculum, and even threatening funding for programs out of political favor. The message from some state capitols is clear: “We’re watching you.”


This surge in oversight and regulatory meddling means university communicators must navigate an increasingly fine line, demonstrating transparency and accountability at every turn to appease regulators while fiercely defending their institution’s academic autonomy.


Political Pressure and DEI Backlash

Diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives are under open attack. What began as partisan rhetoric has evolved into concrete threats – and actions – against campus diversity efforts. Dozens of states have passed or proposed laws to defund DEI offices, ban diversity training, or restrict teaching about race and gender. The result? An “inconsistent and confusing landscape” for colleges as they respond to swelling political pressure. The campaign against campus DEI has dramatically accelerated in 2025, turbocharged by signals from the Trump administration pushing to eliminate DEI efforts across government and higher ed. According to The Chronicle of Higher Education 270 campuses in 38 states have already scaled back or dismantled some DEI programs under this pressure.


For communications teams, the DEI backlash creates a messaging minefield. They must affirm institutional values of inclusion and support for marginalized groups, even as those very programs face hostile scrutiny from powerful critics.


Threats to the Federal Department of Education

In Washington, the unthinkable is suddenly on the table: the U.S. Department of Education itself is in the crosshairs. President Trump has made good on campaign promises by signing an executive order to dismantle the Department of Education. While outright abolition requires Congress, the administration has already laid off nearly half of the department’s staff and moved to strip the agency to its bare bones. “We’re going to shut it down… it’s doing us no good,” Trump declared. This unprecedented move could upend federal support and guidelines for universities – from financial aid administration to civil rights enforcement – leaving states to fill the void.


Communications professionals must reassure students, faculty, and the public that education won’t grind to a halt if federal oversight wanes. It’s a communications tightrope: acknowledging the potential for massive change while conveying stability in the university’s core mission. After all, even if Washington pulls back, universities still answer to accreditation bodies and the public trust.


The Misinformation Deluge on Social Media

The information ecosystem has never been more chaotic – or more dangerous. Universities are grappling with viral misinformation and disinformation that can ignite campus controversies overnight. In the age of TikTok rumors and politicized Twitter (or “X”) feeds, false narratives spread like wildfire before facts can catch up. Recent campus incidents have shown how quickly truth gets muddled: one university saw fake reports about a protest spread widely. At the same time, another dealt with a gross misinterpretation of a student gathering that went viral. Photos and videos are routinely ripped out of context or deliberately edited with misleading labels. The public, meanwhile, is “bombarded with misinformation” online and growing distrustful of experts.


For higher ed communicators, countering misinformation means fighting a two-front war: rapidly correcting falsehoods about their institution and proactively pushing out accurate, compelling content to capture attention before the rumors do.


Economic Uncertainty and Budget Turbulence.

Even aside from targeted funding cuts, universities are feeling economic whiplash. Inflation, endowment fluctuations, and post-pandemic enrolment dips have collided to squeeze campus finances. Many institutions face structural deficits and tough choices about programs and staffing. In fact, according to the Chronicle of Higher Education, two-thirds of colleges now show at least one sign of financial stress – a startling statistic that underscores how widespread the budget crunch has become. From flagship public universities to small private colleges, hiring freezes and spending cuts are the order of the day. Every dollar is scrutinized by trustees and legislators alike.


Communications pros must now operate in a climate of fiscal anxiety, where messages about any new initiative or expense can trigger questions about priorities. The task at hand is to highlight the university’s economic stewardship and continued value to students and the community, even as belts tighten. It’s critical to communicate that the institution is navigating the storm responsibly—protecting its academic core and maximizing the impact of every precious dollar.


Demands to Prove Real-world Impact

“What is higher ed really doing for society?” In 2025, that question echoes from state capitols, donors’ boards, and kitchen tables across America. Universities are under intense pressure to demonstrate the real-world value of their research and teaching like never before. Lawmakers openly discuss ROI (return on investment) for degrees and research grants, seeking data on graduates’ earnings and innovations spawned per taxpayer dollar. Public confidence in higher education has been shaken – a recent Gallup survey found Americans’ confidence in colleges has plummeted to 36%, down from 57% in 2015. Many believe in personal value (a college degree for better jobs) but doubt that higher education delivers for the greater good. In short, the public is skeptical whether campus research and scholarship are worth the cost.


University communicators must do more than publicize exciting discoveries – they must connect the dots for people. Every media release, story, or tweet should answer: Here’s how this university’s work benefits you, your community, and the world. Whether it’s a medical breakthrough, a tech startup from the lab, or a student project solving a local problem, the mandate is clear: show impact or risk losing support.


In my next post, I'll provide a detailed blueprint to help communications professionals proactively plan and organize their teams for the road ahead. This actionable framework will help you better identify where you can add value for your institution where it needs it the most and confirm your critical role as a trusted resource.  To your success!



Upcoming Speaking Events


April 23
PRSA Virtual Workshop
"Cutting Through the Noise: What Thought Leadership Strategies are Working in Today’s Environment”
Register Here

June 8
IABC World Conference, Vancouver
“The Thought Leadership Blueprint: Why & How to Build a High-Impact Program”
Register Here

Sept. 12-13
PRSA East Central Conference, Cleveland
“The New Comms Leadership Skillset”
Register Here



About ExpertFile


ExpertFile is revolutionizing how organizations connect their experts to journalists, podcasters, and conference organizers who need to find credible experts on tight deadlines…fast. Featuring experts on over 50,000 topics, our free Apple and Android mobile app is the go-to resource for journalists at media outlets such as the New York Times, CNN, NPR Radio, Fox News, BBC, The Guardian, ABC News, CBC, AXIOS and Time Magazine. For over a decade, our award-winning software platform has been helping marketing departments better manage and promote their online thought leadership to reach a wider audience. Clients include Carnegie Mellon University, ChristianaCare Health, Villanova University, Aston University and Emory University.


Learn more at: expertfile.com/getstarted

Connect with:
Peter Evans

Peter Evans

Co-Founder & CEO

Recognized speaker on expertise marketing, technology and innovation

Media TrendsThought LeadershipMarketingTechnologyInnovation
Powered by

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from ExpertFile

New Gallup–Lumina Study Data Suggests Parents Can't See What a University Degree Is Really Worth featured image

3 min

New Gallup–Lumina Study Data Suggests Parents Can't See What a University Degree Is Really Worth

Sixty-three percent of Americans say four-year colleges are doing a poor job of making education affordable. Twelve percent say they're doing well. That figure is getting a lot of attention along with other results in the latest Gallup and Lumina Foundation survey of 2,043 adults. Ironically, this data will surprise very few people working in the sector who are paying attention. When you look at the data, one number stands out and provides hope for institutions. Among parents who hold a college degree, 48 percent want a four-year university for their child. And among parents with some college or a high school diploma, fewer than 20 percent do. Both groups want education after high school. What separates them is whether the parent has personally experienced what a degree does to employment, earnings and job satisfaction. So the case for the four-year degree is currently being carried by "lived experience", which, by definition, does not reach families who haven't had it. These are the families four-year institutions most need to reach. Community colleges, by contrast, show what the alternative looks like when it's explained well. They're rated good or excellent by 68 percent on access, 61 percent on quality, 54 percent on affordability and 52 percent on workforce preparation. Four-year institutions lead in one category: advancing knowledge and new discoveries, 53 percent to 46. Price is where institutions have hurt themselves most directly. Net prices have fallen across income brackets and institution types over six years, yet colleges continue publishing sticker figures that most enrolled students never pay. Courtney Brown calls transparency “the missing link in rebuilding trust.” A family that can't determine the price before applying will assume the advertised number is the price. The 3 Themes Run Through this Data Evidence has to Connect with Audiences Who Have No Reference Point: Institutions often position for families who already understand how higher education works. And the survey suggests the persuadable audience is the one that doesn't. Unexplained Value Doesn't Count: A college credential that costs less, takes two years, and ends in a job explains itself. A benefit that compounds over thirty years does not, and most institutions have responded by falling back on median starting salary. Universities need to show other evidence of value.  Scattered Evidence Isn't Discoverable: Aid data, outcomes, faculty expertise, and research impact each live in a different department, in different faculties, and in different systems. It’s challenging for CMO’s to unify all this information. But the market isn’t waiting for that to happen. Students and families now hand that assembly job to an AI search tool, and whatever it retrieves and attributes is functionally what the institution has said. None of this starts with a campaign. Write down the ten questions families ask most often, then check what your website, your faculty pages and an AI assistant currently return for each one. Most institutions find the evidence exists and nobody can locate it. At ExpertFile we understand we can’t fix all of these problems. Nonetheless, we’re working hard to make faculty expertise and research more findable and relatable to a variety of audiences - this includes the students and families that have important questions about the value of university. Americans have not given up on higher education. They just want clearer evidence of what it costs and what it returns, and they want it from credible voices willing to put their names to it.

Expert Insights on the Manhattan High-Rise Structural Concerns featured image

2 min

Expert Insights on the Manhattan High-Rise Structural Concerns

The unfolding structural emergency at the former Pfizer headquarters on East 42nd Street in Midtown Manhattan raises urgent questions issues such as load limits, weight redistribution, structural steel, emergency shoring and in general the challenges of converting older office towers into residential buildings. As officials and engineers continue to investigate what happened, the incident points to a larger issue facing many major cities: how safely can older commercial buildings be adapted for new uses, especially when vertical additions, new floor loads and major structural modifications are involved? ExpertFile has a range of structural engineering experts available to help journalists and audiences understand the engineering issues behind this story. Featured Experts Edward Sippel, P.E., Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Milwaukee School of Engineering Edward Sippel is an expert in structural engineering at the Milwaukee School of Engineering with a focus on steel structures, stability and structural analysis. His expertise in structural steel, finite element analysis and nonlinear analysis makes him especially relevant to questions about column buckling, steel-frame behavior, temporary reinforcement and how engineers assess whether a damaged steel structure can be stabilized or repaired. David O. Prevatt Professor, University of Florida David O. Prevatt is a structural engineer at the University of Florida whose areas of expertise include structural load paths, structural engineering and resilient building performance. His expertise is especially relevant to explaining how loads move through a building, what happens when weight is added or redistributed, and why engineers must understand the full path that gravity loads take from upper floors down to the foundation. Key Questions Experts Can Address How do added floors or major renovations change the way weight moves through an existing building? What causes a steel column to buckle, and how is that different from other types of structural failure? Why do transition points between older and newer parts of a structure require special attention? How do engineers use temporary shoring, jacks and steel reinforcement to stop movement during an emergency? What should cities, developers and regulators consider as office-to-residential conversions become more common? Additional Structural Engineering Experts Available Beyond load paths and steel mechanics, this story also raises broader questions about structural health monitoring, building inspections, retrofits, aging infrastructure, concrete systems, structural dynamics and resilient design. ExpertFile includes additional experts who can speak to these related issues, including: For journalists covering the Manhattan high-rise situation, office-to-residential conversions, emergency building stabilization or the future of urban infrastructure, these experts offer relevant structural engineering expertise that may help add context, clarity and perspective to your reporting. Looking for more experts?  Visit: www.expertfile.com About ExpertFile ExpertFile is the worlds largest open-access, curated search engine for experts. ExpertFile is the best way to search and connect with credible experts on over 50,000+ topics. Our award-winning software platform is trusted by leading knowledge-based organizations to help them manage and connect their research and perspectives to a broader audience. Download the ExpertFile Mobile App.

Built to Last: What It Takes to Compete Across Generations of World Cups featured image

4 min

Built to Last: What It Takes to Compete Across Generations of World Cups

The 2026 FIFA World Cup is giving fans an unusual view of football history: several of the game’s biggest names are still competing long after most elite careers have ended. Cristiano Ronaldo and Lionel Messi are appearing in their sixth World Cups. Ronaldo has scored twice in this tournament and 10 times overall, while Messi has added six goals in 2026 to reach 19 for his World Cup career. Luka Modrić is playing in his fifth tournament. Neymar and Kevin De Bruyne are each appearing in their fourth. Those numbers say something important about talent. They say even more about durability. Reaching one World Cup is difficult. Returning four, five or six times means surviving nearly two decades of club schedules, injuries, travel, tactical changes and competition from younger players. It also means finding new ways to contribute when the body no longer responds exactly as it once did. That opens up several timely questions for journalists covering this final stage of their careers. Below, experts in sports science, biomechanics, psychology and sports business offer perspective on what it takes to compete across multiple World Cups—and what allows some players to remain influential long after their physical peak. What does it take physically to last this long? The World Cup lasts only a few weeks, but the careers behind it are built over thousands of training sessions and matches. For older players, the challenge is not simply staying fit. It is managing fatigue, recovering faster and avoiding the injury that could end the run. Hofstra exercise physiologist Katie Sell can speak to the less visible work behind these careers: sleep, hydration, nutrition, endurance and the tighter recovery window athletes face as they age. At the University of Delaware, Tom Kaminski brings expertise in soccer injuries, concussions and player safety. He can help explain how accumulated wear, repeated head impacts and return-to-play decisions influence whether a player can continue at the highest level. Texas Christian University’s Peter Weyand, an expert in sprint mechanics and running performance, can discuss what happens to speed and acceleration over time—and which physical qualities can still be protected through training. How do great players change their game? Longevity rarely comes from playing the same way forever. Ronaldo moved from the wing into a more central scoring role. Messi became more selective with his movement. Modrić continued to control matches through timing, positioning and awareness rather than physical dominance. These are not signs that aging players have stopped influencing games. They are signs that influence has changed. Carnegie Mellon biomechanics researcher Eni Halilaj can speak to how athletes adjust their movement patterns, conserve energy and reduce physical strain as they get older, while her colleague Eric Yttri, who studies motor control and decision-making, can explain how anticipation and experience allow veteran players to act earlier and more efficiently. Texas Christian University’s Peter Weyand can also add context on why older players often change positions, reduce repeated sprinting or become more selective about when they make high-intensity runs. Why keep coming back? By the time a player reaches a fourth or fifth World Cup, money and recognition are unlikely to be the main reasons for continuing. The harder question is what keeps an athlete committed after years of success, injuries and public scrutiny—especially when their role may be smaller than it once was. TCU sport psychology expert Robyn Trocchio can speak to motivation, focus and how accomplished athletes continue setting meaningful goals late in their careers. Hofstra’s Genevieve Weber can address performance anxiety, media pressure and the emotional weight of entering what may be a final international tournament. Georgia Southern sport psychologist Brandonn Harris can discuss resilience, confidence and the mental discipline required to recover from injury, disappointment and changing expectations. How should an aging superstar be judged? Goals are easy to count. Leadership, timing and influence are not. A veteran player may no longer dominate every match, but may still shape how teammates prepare, how opponents defend and how supporters respond. For coaches, that creates a difficult balance between reputation, current performance and what an experienced player brings in moments of pressure. At Emory University’s Goizueta Business School, Michael Lewis can discuss the value of global stars beyond the score sheet, including fan interest, brand strength and the attention they bring to a national team. Carnegie Mellon University’s Eric Yttri can speak to the on-field contributions that statistics often miss, including positioning, anticipation and decision-making. Texas Christian University’s Robyn Trocchio can address the leadership side of the story, including the difficult transition from automatic starter to mentor, substitute or situational player. A generation nearing the end The 2026 World Cup may be remembered not only for the players who emerged, but for the ones who were leaving. Ronaldo, Messi, Modrić, Neymar and De Bruyne have played through different tactical eras and alongside multiple generations of teammates. Their longevity was not built on talent alone. It required adaptation, recovery, discipline and a willingness to accept that staying great sometimes means becoming a different kind of player. For reporters, their careers offer a timely way to examine how elite athletes age—and why some remain relevant long after the normal limits of the game suggest they should.

View all posts
Powered by