Over the past decade, I've read hundreds of university research communications — magazines, newsletters, annual reports, website features, social media posts. The good ones share certain qualities. The bad ones share certain mistakes.
Here are the five I see most often.
Mistake 1: Leading with the institution instead of the story
This is the most common error, and it's the most damaging.
University communications teams are understandably proud of their institutions. But that pride often manifests as a compulsion to mention the university name in the first sentence of every piece.
"The University of X has announced that researchers from its School of Y..."
The problem: readers don't care about your institution. They care about the research. They care about the implications. They care about the human story behind the discovery.
The fix: Start with the most compelling element of the story. If that's a surprising finding, lead with that. If it's a researcher's personal journey, lead with that. Your institution's name can appear in paragraph two or three. It will still be there.
Mistake 2: Writing for the wrong audience
I once reviewed a university magazine that included a three-page feature on a new molecular biology technique. The article used jargon freely, assumed graduate-level knowledge of biochemistry, and never once explained why the research mattered to anyone outside the field.
The magazine was sent to alumni donors.
This happens more often than you'd think. Universities produce communications that are perfectly pitched for peer researchers — and then distribute them to audiences who have no background in the field.
The fix: Before writing anything, define your audience. Are you writing for alumni? Prospective students? Industry partners? Policymakers? Each audience requires a different register, different levels of technical detail, and different hooks. A good research magazine should be accessible to an intelligent general reader. If your uncle wouldn't understand it, rewrite it.
Mistake 3: Treating quotes as decoration
University communications are full of quotes that say nothing:
"We are delighted to receive this prestigious award, which recognises the excellence of our research in this important area."
This is a wasted opportunity. A great quote should add something the article doesn't already contain — personality, emotion, perspective, or a memorable turn of phrase.
The fix: Interview your researchers properly. Don't email them a list of questions and paste their written answers into the article. Call them. Have a conversation. Ask open-ended questions: What surprised you? What was the hardest part? What would you tell someone who says this research doesn't matter?
The quotes you get from real conversations will be specific, human, and worth reading.
Mistake 4: Ignoring the design-content relationship
I've seen beautifully designed magazines with mediocre writing, and I've seen well-written articles trapped in layouts that make them impossible to read. Both problems stem from the same root: treating design and content as separate processes.
When the writing is done first and handed to a designer, the layout often fights the content. When the design is done first and the writing is squeezed in, the content suffers.
The fix: Treat design and content as a single, integrated process. The best magazines are produced by teams where writers and designers work together from the start. The shape of the story should inform the design, and the design should enhance the story.
This is one of the reasons Stokel Publishing produces complete, integrated publications rather than handing over copy for someone else to lay out. When the journalism and the design come from the same source, the result is a publication that feels cohesive and reads naturally.
Mistake 5: Publishing without a strategy
Many universities produce research magazines because they've always produced research magazines. There's no clear sense of what the publication is for, who it's for, or what success looks like.
The result is a magazine that tries to do everything — serve alumni, attract students, impress funders, celebrate staff achievements, and showcase research — and does none of them well.
The fix: Define the purpose of your research communication before you produce it. What is the primary audience? What do you want them to think, feel, or do after reading? How will you measure success?
A university magazine with a clear purpose is a powerful strategic tool. A university magazine without one is an expensive way to fill a rack in reception.
The Common Thread
Every mistake on this list has the same underlying cause: universities communicate the way institutions communicate, not the way people communicate. The language is formal, the structure is rigid, and the institution is always the hero of the story.
The universities that communicate research effectively are the ones that have learned to tell stories the way journalists tell them — with a clear audience, a compelling narrative, and language that invites rather than excludes.