Hello,
I’m trying out a new letter format where I share what caught my attention in the world of expertise and knowledge communication. That means research, articles, other people’s newsletters, and ideas that stuck with me.
One idea runs through this letter and ties together almost everything I’ve read lately.
Expert organizations (institutes, think tanks, foundations, universities) spent a long time in a world where knowledge was scarce, and so it was valuable.
Every report and every piece of knowledge was valuable simply because it existed. That world is over.
Knowledge is now abundant (maybe too abundant) and accessible (maybe too accessible). But the scarcity hasn’t gone away. It has moved.
The question is whether we’ve moved along with it.
Universities and their scarcity
Universities need to adapt to a world in which knowledge is no longer scarce by Anupama Saini / LSE Impact
I liked this article for two reasons. It isn’t alarmist, and it’s smart.
What’s the setup?
Historically, universities were built to solve a specific problem: the scarcity of knowledge and expertise. Books were expensive, access to experts was limited, and libraries and lectures were tools for gathering rare information in one place and passing it on.
This is the scarcity that AI is eating away at, quickly and thoroughly.
And universities aren’t losing their purpose. They’re losing the scarcity that purpose was built around for centuries.
No spoilers here, so if you want to read the whole thing (it also covers what to do about all this), the full article is on the London School of Economics and Political Science website.
Impact, impact, impact
If you want to dive into something that really hurts and really matters, read James Young’s article How to Make Impact. Making Use of an Overused Word | A Clear Taxonomy for Association Value.
It has everything it takes to raise the blood pressure of anyone who cares and works at an NGO, a public institution, or an expert organization. It’s a deep reflection on what results and impact actually are, how to live with all of this, and how to measure it.
Along the way, it also rethinks the mission of membership organizations a little.
In short, maybe not bedtime reading, but very, very interesting and useful.
A couple of insights from the Future of Media & Technology Conference 2026
What’s interesting in the Reuters Institute’s summary of the Future of Media & Technology Conference 2026?
Very briefly, here are two takeaways:
The end of chasing clicks. Now the chase is for audience relationships, subscriptions, engagement, and loyalty.
Influencerization inside newsrooms. Media outlets are learning from independent creators and bringing their journalists “into the light.” This responds to facelessness in the age of AI and attempts to build trust. It’s interesting, and it applies to expert organizations too.
There’s more → Five takeaways from the Future of Media Technology Conference, Reuters Institute
What about AI shame?
“AI shame” is a new phenomenon that researchers describe in a recent Nieman Lab piece. It’s based on a study of how scientists and researchers use generative AI.
It’s interesting (and a bit ironic) that almost 70% of professionals already use AI heavily in their work, from proofreading and literature searches to coding and data analysis. But they have to do it in secret, or while looking over their shoulder.
It’s all down to AI shame. Standards are vague, institutions don’t give clear rules, and people fear their work will be discredited or dismissed as cutting corners.
It’s just a tool, you’d think. It helps, and your employer may even be paying for it. But admitting it to colleagues feels risky… What if they decide you’re a cheat?
That’s the paradox Nieman Lab writes about.
Read it, and let go of the shame :)
Recommended
«Gary here» newsletter by Gairika Mitra
Gairika is a journalist who moved into communications and writes about PR for small companies without big budgets: “You don’t need a PR agency; you need a story,” “The founder is mostly the best PR asset your company has.”
Her readers are startups, but a lot of it carries over easily to expert organizations. Just replace “founder” with “expert.”
Gairika’s latest piece: Your content is getting views. But is it building your brand?
I write about comms and engagement for expert institutions and knowledge-driven organizations. I write for people who make knowledge reach others: communicators, program managers, researchers, and experts, often working in small teams, within imperfect structures, with limited resources.
Thanks for reading!
See you next week!