>They should be scrutinised. I'm sure they should. http://www.chronicle.com/article/Scholars-Cry-Foul-at-Their/240635 http://www.chronicle.com/article/Scholar

>They should be scrutinised. I'm sure they should. http://www.chronicle.com/article/Scholars-Cry-Foul-at-Their/240635 http://www.chronicle.com/article/Scholars-Cry-Foul-at-Their/... Sarah T. Roberts said she doesn’t understand why she was on the list. Sure, she told The Chronicle, she was a Google fellow in 2009, but that meant a $7,000 award to cover her expenses during a 10-week stint working in Washington, D.C., for the American Library Association. Why that 2009 fellowship would be relevant to a 2015 paper on information privacy — in which Ms. Roberts, an assistant professor of information studies at the University of California at Los Angeles, was listed as the fourth author — is not clear to her. More important, she said, she didn’t receive any money from the technology giant in connection to that paper. And if the advocacy group’s concern was that she had benefited from Google in the past, that information is on her curriculum vitae. "What else would they like me to do?" she asked. "I think it’s pretty irresponsible."