On the first day of my long-awaited vacation—finally a quiet home, no kids, no noise— I found myself scrolling through Facebook. Among the usual posts, one in particular caught my eye: a feature on a young Egyptian researcher, currently pursuing her PhD, highlighted on a popular Egyptian page celebrating women’s achievements. What struck me was not her profile itself, but the way she was described: “pioneering” and “one of the few” in her field. To me, these are powerful words, usually reserved for scientists whose discoveries reshape entire disciplines, who lead labs, secure funding, and train teams of young scholars. Seeing such “big words” used so lightly made me pause. Was this really a celebration of a scientific achievement, or just hype for social media clicks? It reminded me of a wider trend in Egypt—and elsewhere—where science communication is moving away from celebrating real milestones, like publishing a paper or winning a grant, toward building a “brand” out of a researcher’s profile. That brand can then be used for career progression, visibility, or even funding applications. This shift creates a culture where being visible seems to matter more than producing actual results. The concern is that young researchers are pushed to present themselves as leaders or innovators long before their work has had time to show real value.
And it’s not only students. Many early-, mid-career, and senior academics are also more focused on image and social media clicks than on producing solid science. This in a way, might reinforce the unfair stereotype of Egyptian researchers as “predatory,” a label that damages the reputation of our whole community. The sad part is that shallow visibility often takes the spotlight, while serious academics—already struggling with limited resources, heavy teaching loads, and fewer publishing opportunities—are left carrying the weight of an undeserved reputation. If we want a “fair science community for all,” As my colleague Sherif Abo El-Hadid has written in his blog, we need to be recognized for producing real science and training proper scholars.
This culture is also shaping undergraduate students. Many chase quick “achievements” such as attending predatory conferences, proud simply to be recognized there without realizing the harm it does. Others turn to TikTok to post science-related videos, but without proper guidance, these often spread incorrect or oversimplified information. I am not against science communication—on the contrary, it is essential. But it must be done responsibly, with accuracy. A good example is El-Da7ee7, who manages to be both engaging and credible. Sadly, many students genuinely want real research opportunities to grow their careers, but instead they are drawn into this “branding culture,” hoping visibility alone will secure their future.
The spread of inaccurate science doesn’t stay in academic circles—it shapes how the public views science and how people make decisions about health, the environment, and daily life. In Egypt, where public awareness of science is still fragile, this misinformation can easily weaken trust and even put people at risk. If Egypt’s scientific community is to grow stronger and gain international recognition, we must shift the focus back to credibility and real achievements. Visibility has its place, but it should come as a result of achievement, not replace it. Universities need to provide training in responsible science communication and ethics, just as they teach experiment design and data analysis. Senior academics should help students avoid predatory conferences and instead encourage them to seek genuine opportunities. Professional bodies and the media should highlight real milestones—publishing in respected journals, winning grants, receiving awards, or leading valuable collaborations—rather than rewarding surface-level visibility.
Egypt is not separate from the world; our challenges reflect global ones. But if we strengthen credibility here, we can become a model for how research communities can grow without falling into the trap of “branding culture.” At the end of the day, the real recognition should come not from likes or views, but from how many genuine citations our articles receive. But the story of “genuine citations” is one for another blog post.
Disclaimer: This article reflects my own views and experiences. AI-based tools were used only for language refinement and polishing; all ideas, arguments, and conclusions remain my own.
