Who killed the intellectual creativity of the ANZMAC papers? In a world of academic thought espousing academic freedom, intellectual endeavour and the pursuit of new academic thought, the ANZMAC conference paper lies dying from near terminal wounds. Was there a murder? An accident? Or have old age and clogged reviewing arteries finally taken their toll?
In 200 words, this dramatic summary of the Essential Scholarly Exchange attempts the best of academic practice and the worst of advertising excess. As the only printed item you'll read before the conference, this abstract must inform (the paper is critical of the ANZMAC process), persuade (Please come to my session) and summarise the paper (Marketing theory used. Paper lengths criticised). At best, the abstract attempts to convey the plot of essential scholarly exchange in less words than a film review. At worst, it's 200 words summarising the criticism that struggled to stay inside the perversely arbitrary page restriction. The paper covers issues of the impact of 5 page long papers on marketing in single line space, and within 2.5 centimetre boundaries. Proposals for reforming the ANZMAC paper process will be suggested, and the word length exceed just before the paper gets to the interesting part.
(less)
