More BP Hubbub

Now that I have five seconds to sleep and breathe again, here are some links to more information about the ever-controversial BP Deal at UC Berkeley, and a little more of my opinion. 

The official opposition website is:
http://stopbp-berkeley.org/

Art History professor and Big Deal, Anne Wagner, wrote this article to the California Progress Report:
http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/2007/04/rush_of_uc_to_a.html

If you have Facebook, this is the main student oppositional group's page:
http://berkeley.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2244148181

I tend to agree with Anne Wagner's (and the bulk of the humanists') general position-- that opposition to the deal isn't opposition entlrely, but opposition to the process and contract as it exists now. 

Money is money, but the integrity of the academic institution must be maintained in the highest regard, especially in a public university. University oversight and BP transparency about the process is essential to producing intellectually sound research that walks the talk of possibilities. 

Like I said in my other BP post, I think it's a great PR strategy for BP and the like to have multi-national corporations and universities doing research together: it shows the public that BP cares about the community enough to spend money researching non-petroleum energy sources, it shows that BP cares about the sciences because it's donating lots of money, and it shows that BP cares about being fair and less evil by conducting that research in a public university-- even better, having that public university do the research for them.

However, the process needs to be as fair and open as the PR strategy suggests. I have not conducted nearly enough research of my own to substantiate this claim, but I don't believe there would be as much controversy about the whole situation if there weren't at least a couple things that BP has been shady about, like not informing the public about meetings, and announcing the deal in a big royal flourish before anyone knew about it-- and being shady is precisely the opposite of what BP should be doing if they want to be in bed with a very liberal hippie douche university. 

There would probably also be less controversy if people opposing it were smarter (like Facebook group wall-commenters, and recent Sather Gate tree-sitters) and less afraid of corporate sponsorship. The university probably can't afford to conduct this research without funding from a large private donor, and this is a large private donor willing to part with lots of money to fund research. As long as we orchestrate the process effectively, openly, and fairly, there should be nothing to worry about. 

On the other hand, I'm sure there is a contingent of Berkeleyans who believe that BP just wanted to hit us over the head with some ugly deal, anticipated this response, and will move forward with a more transparent plan that nevertheless has evil intentions. But I still don't see how the more transparent process would hinder academic freedom, which is what the university is all about in the first place.