(A policy paper prepared for submission to the House of Commons Education Select Committee and published for wider public circulation.)
by Peter Kahl, 2025-08-19
This report examines Times Higher Education (THE) as a conflicted commercial intermediary whose roles in rankings, journalism, consultancy, and elite convening undermine transparency and accountability in higher education governance. Unlike universities, regulators, or charities, THE operates as a private company without fiduciary obligations to the public, yet wields quasi-regulatory influence over institutional reputations and policymaking. Through analysis of its World University Rankings, consultancy services, paywalled journalism, and the July 2025 soirée with political figures, the report demonstrates how THE exemplifies epistemic clientelism: influence and information are brokered through closed commercial and social circuits rather than open scrutiny. The paper argues for statutory transparency obligations, structural separation of functions, and recognition of THE as an interested party in parliamentary processes. These measures are necessary to ensure that higher education policy and governance are not distorted by private incentives operating behind opaque structures.
Times Higher Education, higher education governance, university rankings, conflicts of interest, consultancy, journalism, fiduciary openness, epistemic clientelism, knowledge intermediaries, transparency, accountability, parliamentary evidence
Kahl, P. (2025). Report on Times Higher Education: Conflicts of interest in rankings, journalism, and consultancy. Lex et Ratio Ltd. https://github.com/Peter-Kahl/Report-on-Times-Higher-Education-Conflicts-of-Interest
First published in London by Lex et Ratio Ltd, 2025-08-19.
© 2025 Lex et Ratio Ltd. Licensed under Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0.
You may share this work for non-commercial purposes with attribution and without modification.
Licence available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .