Name confusion: 'Wired' covers UMR student project, 'University of Missouri' gets the recognition
When we developed our case for a name change last fall, I thought one of the most compelling arguments -- at least from a PR and marketing standpoint -- had to do with how the national news media so often confuse us with the University of Missouri-Columbia, or just "University of Missouri," which in the minds of many, means the campus in Columbia.
"The UMR name," we wrote back then, "is well known in our geographic region and among the research agencies and corporate recruiters aware of our areas of expertise. However, beyond those areas, the name and reputation are either confused with MU or unknown by uninformed students, corporate partners and opinion leaders." We also pointed out that "Alumni, faculty and staff report the campus confusion, as they are often referred to as being associated with the 'University of Missouri' in edited biographies, introductions and news media reports."
It's that association that really sticks in my craw as a PR guy.
Case in point: The latest edition of Wired magazine carries a nice article about last spring's Regolith Excavation Challenge, a program put on by NASA that is "aimed at applying outsider ingenuity to space colonization." One of the teams was from this campus. (We blogged all about it before, during and after the competition, and got some pretty nice media coverage about our Lunar Miners team and their excavation craft. We even got a mention on the Wired Science blog.)
But in the September 2007 edition of Wired, our team is known merely as "11 University of Missouri students." Here's the context, from the story's opening paragraphs:
Four couch-sized contraptions, all clearly homebuilt, sit inside a cavernous building at the Santa Maria, California, fairgrounds. One, made of unfinished wood, has denim conveyor belts running over purple and orange plastic beads. It's the brainchild of a boiler engineer from Michigan, whose girlfriend sewed the belts. Another, cobbled together by a systems analyst from nearby Arroyo Grande, features a set of steel trays attached to a long bicycle chain. A team of Los Angeles engineers used precisely machined aluminum and incorporated a toothed rotor that spins like a waterwheel. The tallest of the bunch, standing about 5 feet high, is a clattering assemblage of aluminum scoops mounted on a red conveyor. It represents a year and a half of work by 11 University of Missouri students, two of whom drove 30 hours to get the thing here. They're still scrambling to apply the finishing touches, slapping masking tape on the cups and adjusting bungee cords to keep it upright.
That really sticks in my craw. But perhaps it will drive home at least one of the points we made in the rationale for the name change.
Comments
Now onwards, the credits will rightfully be attributed to Missouri S & T whenever the significant event/discovery takes place. On an unrelated topic, I may want to draw your attention to a news story that appeared on the News Hour (PBS) about the UMR bridge development after that Minnesota bridge disaster. Dr. Dharani of Mech Engr. along with the professors from Civil Engr. were interviewed. I do not remember the exact date, but I wish that somehow this could be placed on our website.
Posted by: Pradip Shah | August 29, 2007 07:06 PM
Hello, Pradip:
The PBS "NewsHour With Jim Lehrer" program that featured our three faculty members aired on Aug. 13, 2007, and is still available online at http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/science/july-dec07/bridges_08-13.html. In addition, we posted a link to the video on our In the News web page. There are a lot of other good stories on that site for anyone interested in knowing how the news media are covering UMR.
Posted by: Andrew Careaga | August 29, 2007 07:46 PM
I'm writing because I doubt my comment will make it up yet I want you to know that I realize you're screening so you only get positive comments for this blog. And if you keep this up, I'm going to go to real media and let them know just how poorly UMR treats it's alumni.
Posted by: Jamie | September 11, 2007 03:12 AM
The thing to remember is that MSM graduates were University of Missouri graduates. MSM was the University of Missouri School of Mines and Metalurgy.
All UMR students are University of Missouri students, as are students at UMKC, UMSL, and UMC. It is the same Board of Curators.
MST students will still be University of Missouri students, for MST will still be part of the University of Missouri system.
You can't run away from what you are.
As a UMR graduate, I do not have any problems with most people in Washington State (where I now live) not knowing the difference between UMC, UMKC, UMSL, and UMR. Why should they? Most people in Missouri do not know the difference between UW, UW-Tacoma, UW-Bothell, WSU, and WSU-Vancouver. It's a fact of life. Deal with it.
(Interestingly enough, I have run across more people in the other Vancouver--Vancouver, British Columbia--that immediately know the difference between the UM campuses, particularly UMR from UMC. Maybe your PR has worked better in Canada? Maybe the UBC Engineering program has helped our name recognition? It can't be because there is a Rolla, BC. If that were the case, they would know more about UMR in North Dakota.)
I still think that, in the days of Google, you really don't want to make to make it too easy for those that can't figure out the difference between UMR and UMC to apply to the right school. It is a form of natural selection to make sure the cream rises to UMR.
This name change is a waste of money and a loss of over 125 years of honorable history. (Remember that many people called MSM the "Rolla School of Mines," so the city name was attached, even in those days.) I guess those that still whine over the loss of the MSM "brand" have to be appeased.
Posted by: Robert Chapman, '78 | September 12, 2007 12:22 AM
This comment is too late, but by changing the name to the MO University of
S C I ence and T echnology, one could easily nickname it the Missouri University of SH*T, or U SH*T.
Perhaps we could consider reversing name to the MO Univ of Tech and Science. I can't think of a derogatory acronym for that name.
Posted by: Abigail | September 12, 2007 07:10 PM
Andrew, when I read that article in WIRED, I thought for sure that this was a story about UMR students. Hopefully the name change will help correct these mistakes.
Posted by: Patrick Schroeder, BS 2000 | September 14, 2007 05:32 AM
Basically, Missouri has too many state supported colleges and universities. Since we don't have a Wisconsin, New York or California system where all (or most) of the state institutions are "University of State at City," changing the name of UMR makes the most sense. The other alternatives would have been to put all the schools into the UM system and end up with UM Cape Girardeau, UM Joplin, UM Maryville, UM Kirksville etc. At minimum the state could have gone with a California like two tier system. University of Missouri at city and Missouri State at city. The UM system and Springfield would never go for the former while the other regional campuses would never go for the later. It's a bit of a shame really as we'll all just keep fighting over the ever shrinking state budget rather than working together as one united higher education front.
Posted by: Jeff '92 | September 18, 2007 04:25 AM
And people say what's in a name.
Andrew, thanks for bringing attention to this and advocating the change. As a former UMR alumini I truely hope our students and faculty get the credit they deserve in the future.
Posted by: los angeles team building | March 17, 2008 08:30 PM