The Silence of the Ivory-Tower Public-Diplomacy Lambs

I have observed (maybe with insufficient information) how few are the learned Public Diplomacy scholars from distinguished American universities who have publicly contributed to the current "Should the Smith-Mundt Act be Amended" debate, covered far too inadequately in recent issues of the Public Diplomacy Review. With a few notable exceptions, among them this excellent piece, (with which I do not entirely agree) thus far it has been mostly non-academics and journalists who have opined about this issue ... Is this silence of the ivory-tower public-diplomacy lambs an indication on their part that the SM controversy is just a tempest in a teapot, or do they feel they need more time for reflection?