University of Nike [Book Review]
In University of Nike, investigative journalist Joshua Hunt delivers a gripping exposé that is part campus history, part corporate thriller, and part cautionary tale about the commodification of higher education in the United States. At the heart of the narrative is the University of Oregon and its deep financial entanglement with Nike and its co-founder, Phil Knight—a relationship that, as Hunt reveals, transformed the university’s priorities, culture, and independence in ways that raise serious questions about the integrity of public education.
From the very first page, Hunt’s storytelling is sharp, engaging, and at times unsettling. He draws readers into the story by chronicling how the University of Oregon, once a modest state institution, became a branding powerhouse, remade by Nike’s billion-dollar influence. Hunt argues persuasively that what happened in Eugene, Oregon is not an isolated case, but a stark example of how corporate money, often welcomed with open arms by underfunded public institutions, can quietly, but profoundly, shift the mission of a university away from education and research toward image, entertainment, and loyalty to powerful donors.
One of the book’s central themes is the erosion of academic independence in the face of philanthropy that comes with strings attached. Hunt traces how Phil Knight, a former UO track athlete and the billionaire founder of Nike, used his fortune to reshape the university into a gleaming showcase for Nike’s brand. From the iconic “O” logo plastered across sports gear to extravagant athletic facilities that rival luxury hotels, the transformation of the campus became a symbol of corporate influence run amok. Hunt does not shy away from the irony: a public university, paid for in part by taxpayer dollars, increasingly functions to serve the PR interests of a private corporation.
What’s especially compelling—and at times troubling—is the way Hunt shows how these changes affect not just buildings or branding, but institutional decision-making. He recounts how university administrators, grateful (or perhaps dependent) on Knight’s generosity, made decisions that prioritised athletics over academics, silenced critics, and discouraged dissent. One telling example is the pressure placed on faculty members who spoke out against Knight’s influence or Nike’s labour practices abroad. Hunt meticulously documents instances in which academic freedom was compromised in favour of maintaining a lucrative relationship with Nike, effectively turning the university into what some critics dubbed “the University of Nike.”
The book also highlights the broader implications of this corporate model of education. As public funding for universities continues to shrink, Hunt suggests, schools are more likely to turn to wealthy individuals and corporations to fill the gap. But unlike government support, which is (ideally) guided by democratic oversight and a public mandate, corporate sponsorship is inherently self-interested. Hunt raises a troubling question: when a university relies on the generosity of a single brand or benefactor, who really gets to decide what the institution values—students, educators, or shareholders?
While international families often look to US universities for their world-class facilities, reputation, and sports culture, this book peels back the curtain to reveal the high cost of that prestige. Hunt's investigation is not an indictment of philanthropy itself, but a call for greater transparency, accountability, and a return to the foundational principles of education: the pursuit of knowledge, the freedom of inquiry, and the development of human potential, not brand loyalty.
Importantly, Hunt doesn’t vilify Knight or Nike in cartoonish terms. Instead, he paints a nuanced picture of a benefactor who sincerely believes in the power of athletic success and brand prestige to elevate an institution. But he also shows how unchecked influence, even when driven by good intentions, can distort the mission of a public university. It’s a subtle, sobering reminder that power, whether economic or political, always deserves scrutiny, especially when it comes into contact with education.
Hunt’s background as a New York Times reporter is evident in the depth of his sourcing and the strength of his investigative work. He connects the dots across decades, following the money trail and piecing together a story that is both specific to Oregon and reflective of a larger, systemic trend in global higher education.
University of Nike is more than just a story about one university and one corporation. It’s a reflection of what happens when education is reshaped by branding, marketing, and financial dependency. For parents considering university options for their children, whether locally or abroad, this book is a compelling, thought-provoking read that prompts a deeper question: What do we want our universities to stand for?
Last Updated on 23 June 2025
Proud father of two lovely kids, who at times pushed me to seriously consider editing out the word “lovely” from this sentence. (I am not alone in this.)
You might also like
