If we go back thirty or forty years, we can observe that educational institutions, especially universities, rarely displayed advertisements or visual projections of their activities. Academic life was largely grounded in physical presence on campus. Faculty members and students met regularly, exchanged ideas, debated concepts, and engaged in intellectual discussions both inside and outside the classroom. As a result, knowledge production occurred naturally through dialogue, reflection, and collaborative inquiry. Today, however, a different phenomenon is emerging. Universities increasingly rely on pictures, pictorial displays, and visual representations as the hallmark of their institutional identity. This shift largely began with the rise of the competitive admission race. To secure the highest possible number of admissions, universities began emphasising promotional activities, visual campaigns, and public displays of events.
The Korean-German philosopher Byung-Chul Han, in The Transparency Society, argues that contemporary culture privileges visibility and immediate display over depth, reflection, and contemplation. In such a society, everything must be made visible and instantly consumable. Similarly, Jean Baudrillard’s concept of hyperreality suggests that modern societies increasingly live in a world where representations replace reality itself. In this hyperreal condition, what appears real is often merely a copy of a copy. Students may feel satisfied with these impressive visuals, seminar photographs, activity videos, promotional reels, but such representations do not necessarily prepare them for the realities of professional life. In the future, they will be required to demonstrate practical skills, intellectual capacity, and substantive knowledge to contribute meaningfully to society. Visual satisfaction cannot replace intellectual preparation. Social media has further intensified this trend. Platforms dedicated to images and videos have transformed everyday life into a sequence of visual performances. Reality itself appears to have receded behind screens. Human relationships are increasingly formed, sustained, and even broken through images and digital interactions. Baudrillard’s claim that we inhabit a world of simulacra, a world dominated by representations rather than reality, appears strikingly relevant.
Academic programs, curricula, and degree structures should be revised to emphasise genuine knowledge production rather than mere display
Unfortunately, this transformation has also affected higher education institutions. Universities, which were traditionally spaces for rigorous intellectual engagement between teachers and students, now often prioritise visual projection over intellectual depth. Another factor contributing to this shift is the global university ranking system. Rankings often require clear documentation of institutional activities, events, conferences, outreach programs, and promotional displays. These requirements encourage universities to produce and circulate visuals rather than concentrate on the deeper tasks of producing, preserving, and innovating knowledge. Consequently, institutions compete to create stronger and more appealing optics. Significant financial and intellectual resources are redirected toward promotional visibility instead of academic development. Knowledge production is increasingly replaced by the spectacle of knowledge.
This situation has also produced a troubling social consequence: the gradual marginalisation of the professor’s intellectual presence. Instead of direct engagement with scholars, students increasingly turn to video lectures and social media personalities. YouTube channels and online influencers sometimes function as substitute professors, creating the illusion that success lies primarily in producing digital content rather than engaging in sustained intellectual dialogue. The rise of digital books has further reinforced this visual culture. Reading increasingly occurs on screens rather than through physical books. While there is nothing inherently wrong with digital reading, excessive dependence on screens can reduce the depth of engagement that traditional reading often encourages. Screen-based learning should therefore remain connected to in-person discussion, practical activity, and skill-based education within universities.
However, it is important to note that universities whose graduates successfully enter the job market and attain influential positions in society rarely depend heavily on such visual promotion. These institutions continue to focus on rigorous academic engagement within their campuses. Their priority remains equipping students with knowledge, skills, and intellectual discipline so that they may contribute effectively to society. Such universities do not struggle for admissions; rather, they receive a steady influx of applicants each year because their reputation is built on the success of their graduates. This phenomenon reflects what sociologist Pierre Bourdieu calls symbolic capital: prestige accumulated through visible markers of status rather than through substantive intellectual contributions. Universities today compete within this symbolic economy, where appearance itself becomes academic currency.
The German philosopher Martin Heidegger warned that technological societies tend to treat knowledge as something to be displayed, organised, and managed rather than something to be discovered through thoughtful contemplation. His warning appears increasingly relevant to contemporary higher education. Therefore, universities must reconsider their current trajectory. They need to take a decisive turn away from excessive reliance on optics, media projection, and visual promotion. Instead, institutions should restore the central role of direct intellectual engagement between faculty and students. Academic programs, curricula, and degree structures should be revised to emphasise genuine knowledge production rather than mere display. Ultimately, universities must remember their fundamental purpose: to cultivate critical thinking, intellectual depth, and practical competence. Only by returning to these principles can higher education institutions truly prepare students for the complex challenges of the future.
The writer is a professor of English at Government Emerson University, Multan. E-mail: zeadogar@ hotmail.com Tweets at @Profzee