Dr Chris Smith Urges Public Support to Save Naked Scientists Amid Cambridge Redundancy Plan

Dr Chris Smith, host of the Naked Scientists, discloses that Cambridge University intends to redundantly cut his position, potentially jeopardising the Naked Scientists outreach and his medical consultant role. He argues the decision overlooks the program’s impact and reach, including its long history since 2001 and thousands of interviews during the pandemic. He asks listeners to act by writing an email via a link he will share, describing what the program has meant to them and why keeping it connected to Cambridge matters. He warns that the consultation period is closing soon and promises to keep the audience informed.

• Redundancy risk threatens the Naked Scientists and Cambridge connection.
• Audience action requested: email decision-makers via nakedscientist.comsos.
• Program impact highlighted: global reach, high download figures, pandemic interviews.
• Urgency due to imminent consultation deadline.

Introduction: a plea in a time of cost cutting

The podcast opens with Dr Chris Smith expressing profound disappointment that his long association with the University of Cambridge could end due to cost-cutting measures. He explains that a redundancy could end the Naked Scientists program and threaten the team he leads, as well as his medical consultant role, which is tied to university employment. He emphasizes his years of effort to promote science, technology and medicine to a global audience and notes the program’s origins at Cambridge dating back to 2001.

Context: reach, impact and the value of science outreach

Smith highlights the scale and reach of the outreach work. He claims close to 150 million downloads of Naked Scientists programs since inception, with the show inspiring young people to pursue science at prestigious institutions around the world. He also points to thousands of media interviews conducted during the pandemic, which helped the public understand the university’s contributions to the fight against COVID-19. He argues that decision-makers may not appreciate the quality, reach and impact of this outreach work or how it shapes public perception of the university and its relevance to society.

The call to action: a simple step to fix the situation

To fix the situation, Smith makes a direct appeal to listeners: write an email to the people responsible for the decision, describing what the program means to them, how long they have followed it, how it connects them to Cambridge, and how the university’s reputation would change if the relationship ends. He stresses the need for urgency, noting that the consultation period ends imminently and that they may only have days to influence the outcome. He directs listeners to nakedscientist.comsos for a transcript and details about the responsible authorities, and to draft emails in solidarity with the Naked Scientists team.

Conclusion: a hopeful appeal

Smith closes by expressing a hope to turn the situation around and promises to keep listeners informed about any developments. The overarching theme is that science outreach is a critical bridge between Cambridge and a global audience, and preserving it requires public engagement and timely action.