May 2011 - Air-L - lists.aoir.org

Re: [Air-L] a question about privacy protection and copyright in Internet research
by jeremy hunsinger 11 May '11

11 May '11

Well what actually happens when you put something on facebook? it isn't like you are sending a private letter to a group of friends. it is much closer to going to a shopping mall where all the video cameras are tracking your every move. It isn't your property you are acting within... it is facebooks, in doing that acting you are agreeing with the terms that they put upon you. It isn't about your or my ethics Michael at that point, it isn't about what we should do or our ethical systems, it is then about the agreement that we consent to. There are no subjects to ask what you want to ask if you are doing document based research. You can ask the webpage, but your browser probably is not going to respond. The assumption you are putting forth is one that... there are subjects and it matters what their opinion is, but I want to say, when I read and interpret a book, a newspaper, a public record or any other published document, I need not consider that. You want to say perhaps that 'they don't know they are publishing it' and even if they publish it 'they might not want it researched' but that is not something we afford authors of published documents. We could, but I think it is going the wrong direction. That debate, I'd argue ended, when they put on the web in a manner similar to a published document in which it is assigned a copyright and is freely available to anyone without login. I've already stated that login may change that status. I think you can do research on a database with personally identifiable positions without running afowl of u.s. standards for research ethics and I mostly agree with that personally. If the data was freely given to a corporation and then the corporation freely gives it to you, then I don't think anyone is going to have any issue with you using that data as it was a. previously gathered and b. you are not interacting with the people. It might not be something people like, but I think that is generally the way it works. We have many colleagues doing this research right now actually, they all seem to have had their material passed by IRB's, most I suspect with waivers, but some perhaps with deeper reviews. I am fairly certain that if Facebook gave me data that they collected with personally identifiable information in it, and it was given under contract, and I ran that by the irb they would treat it much like they treat personally identifiable census data or use of standard social research data sets with individually identifiable data, that is... unless it contains private information, which as I said is a problematic construct, it is probably going to get a waiver, and the debate about whether these are human subjects or not, won't come up gotta run to an appt. but look forward to rejoinders. On May 10, 2011, at 10:33 AM, Michael Zimmer wrote: > I find this logic troubling, Jeremy. > > In our earlier exchange about Facebook suddenly making something public that was originally shared to a limited group, you seem to be placing strong preference on what a platform might afford at a given time (does it make something publicly available) rather than what the subject expected/intended/currently desires. That's not how I wish to have research ethics determined. > > And below you again now that "Texts are not people. Representations of people are not people", and appear to state that unless you are directly engaging with a human, you're not engaging in human subject research. Elizabeth has replied in part on this, but just to add: your logic seems to indicate that I can do research using a database of personally-identifiable and sensitive information, publish my results, etc without ever having to worry about ethics related to "human subjects" since I'm merely using a database, a "representation of people". Is this your position? > > -mz > > > -- > Michael Zimmer, PhD > Assistant Professor, School of Information Studies > Co-Director, Center for Information Policy Research > University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee > e: zimmerm(a)uwm.edu > w: www.michaelzimmer.org > > > On May 10, 2011, at 8:33 AM, jeremy hunsinger wrote: > >> I think i already mentioned the private information exception. But past that, as I said, instead of complicating it, i argue that we we need to simplify it. Texts are not people. Representations of people are not people. Whatever claims people have on those objects are not claims against their nature, they are claims to ownership or copyright. That is the line I think we have to take here. Things like documents are not research subjects. They are research objects, research quasi-objects, but they don't rise to the level of being a research subject no matter what exterior subjective claims people put on them. If they have private information embedded in them, that is still an object, the issue with private information is not that the object becomes a research subject, but that the claim of a subject overrides the interests of the researcher in that case. So my argument is that the private information claim is not that it transforms the document, but it creates a clai >> m by one person upon another based on the claim of privacy, however... very few things once published rise to that claim of private, especially once they are published, for instance a person's name on a document published is not private, it isn't private in the newspaper, it isn't private on public documents, nor are other identifying characteristics, height, demographic features, even salary might be public. So what rises to the claim of private in a public document? Medical records are one... though even then medical records can be made public by any number of sources and once public, might not be made private again. so... this line... seems really to be far, quite far away. Treat a published source as a published source, it is not a research subject. >> >> >> >> On May 10, 2011, at 8:58 AM, Elizabeth Buchanan wrote: >> >>> Hey, all, >>> >>> I'm late in adding a couple of points about this discussion. From a US-human subjects perspectives (talking more regulatory), I disagree with Jeremy's hard line "if you are dealing with texts, you are not dealing with research subjects." I disagree with it from disciplinary and philosophical perspectives, but, that would take us down the road of another discussion. >>> >>> But--from a US regulatory perspective,(f) Human subject means a living individual about whom an investigator (whether professional or student) conducting research obtains >>> >>> (1) Data through intervention or interaction with the individual, or >>> (2) Identifiable private information. >>> >>> So, I would argue that to patently reject "texts" as subjects is a risky choice and not a line that holds a lot of ethical weight; disciplinary specificity is very important for this discussion--these decisions are not, should no,t be based on only one set of criteria; with online research, as we know, there are community (or venue) norms, ethics, practices; disciplinary norms, ethics, practices; extant research ethics guidelines at the federal/country/commission level; and, increasingly, third party (eg, Facebook, etc etc) norms, "ethics", practices. All of those must be considered in making these decisions about research practices. >>> >>> Regarding the issue of public v private (which I agree with Michael is a fluid and moving dichotomy), again, from a regulatory perspective, there are boundaries: >>> >>> From 101 (b)(2) and 101(b)(4) in the CFR 45: >>> >>> Regarding online observation and exemptions for existing data, the issue of researcher "entry requirements" and "threshold of access" is significant. The OHRP standard is "what is readily ascertainable." If there are costs, restrictions, or other measures that prevent data from being "readily ascertainable, "the exemption does not apply and the data should be considered private. (This comes from a report in draft form, written with a colleague from the Office for Human Research Protections here in the US.If you are looking for more regulatory guidance, I can share this report). >>> >>> Recently, I gave a few talks with the lawyer who advises OHRP, and while they have issued no formal guidance on Internet research in particular, some interpretations have been presented. I can share our powerpoints on Internetresearchethics.org for those interested. >>> >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> e. >>> >>> >>> Elizabeth A. Buchanan, Ph.D. >>> Endowed Chair in Ethics >>> Director, Center for Applied Ethics >>> University of Wisconsin-Stout >>> PO Box 790 >>> Menomonie, Wisconsin, 54751-0790 >>> >>> buchanane(a)uwstout.edu >>> >>> >>> Principal Investigator, >>> Internet Research Ethics Commons >>> internetresearchethics.org >>> (NSF Project # 0924604) >>> >>> elizabeth(a)internetresearchethics.org >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> The Air-L(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list >>> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >>> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >>> >>> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >>> http://www.aoir.org/ >> >> Jeremy Hunsinger >> Center for Digital Discourse and Culture >> Virginia Tech >> >> >> >> Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. >> --Pablo Picasso >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> The Air-L(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list >> is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >> Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org >> >> Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >> http://www.aoir.org/ > Jeremy Hunsinger Center for Digital Discourse and Culture Virginia Tech Words are things; and a small drop of ink, falling like dew upon a thought, produces that which makes thousands, perhaps millions, think. --Byron

7 10

Call for Papers: ICITST-2011!
by g.akmayeva＠icitst.org 10 May '11

10 May '11

Apologies for cross-postings! Kindly email this Call for Papers to your colleagues, faculty members and postgraduate students. CALL FOR PAPERS ************************************************************ The 6th International Conference for Internet Technology and Secured Transactions (ICITST-2011), Technical Co-Sponsored by IEEE UAE Computer Chapter December 11–14, 2011, Abu Dhabi, UAE (www.icitst.org) ************************************************************ The 6th International Conference for Internet Technology and Secured Transactions (ICITST-2011) is Technical Co-sponsored by IEEE UAE Computer Chapter. The ICITST is an international refereed conference dedicated to the advancement of the theory and practical implementation of secured Internet transactions and to fostering discussions on information technology evolution. The ICITST aims to provide a highly professional and comparative academic research forum that promotes collaborative excellence between academia and industry. The topics in ICITST-2011 include but are not confined to the following areas: Internet Application and Technology: * Internet Architecture * Internet of things * Broadband Access Technologies * Application Agents * Boundary Issues of Internet Security * Database Management * Data Models for Production Systems and Services * Artificial Intelligence and Expert Systems * IPSec Quality of Service * Knowledge Management * Embedded Systems * Defence Systems Ubi/Cloud Computing: * Authentication and Access Control for Data Protection in Ubi/Cloud Computing * Context-Awareness and its Data Mining for UbiCom * Data Grids * Distributed Information Systems * Human-Computer Interface and Interaction for UbiCom * Ubiquitous Systems * USN/RFID Service * Smart Homes and its Business Model for UbiCom Service * Security and its Data Management for UbiCom * Peer to Peer Data Management * New Novel Mechanism and Application for Ubi/Cloud Computing Information Security: * Trust, Privacy and Data Security * Network Security Issues and Protocols * Security Challenges and Content Authoring * Cryptography * Secure Communications * Authentication Techniques * Chaos-based Data Security * MANET Security * Wireless Sensor Network Security * Organization Considerations in Security Policy Formulation and Implementations * Digital Forensics and Crimes * Biometrics * Cyber Security Multimedia and Web Services: * Intelligent Multimedia and its Data Management * Multimedia Information Systems * Multimedia Security * Web Databases * Web Metrics and its Applications * Web Mining including Web Intelligence and Web 3.0. * Web Services * XML and other extensible languages * Semantic Web and Ontology Infonomics and e-Technology: * Infonomics * Information Visualization * Information Management * Information Quality * Technology-Enabled Information * e-Learning * e-Commerce * e-Business * e-Government * e-Society * System Design and Security for e-Services * Synchronizing e-Security IMPORTANT DATES Full Paper Submission Date: June 30, 2011 Extended Abstract (Work in Progress) Submission Date: July 31, 2011 Proposal for Workshops and Tutorials: May 31, 2011 Notification of Workshop and Tutorial Acceptance: June 05, 2011 Proposal for Industrial Presentation: April 30, 2011 Notification of Extended Abstract Acceptance/Rejection: August 15, 2011 Notification of Industrial Presentation Acceptance: May 10, 2011 Notification of Paper Acceptance/Rejection: July 31, 2011 Camera Ready Extended Abstract Due: August 31, 2011 Camera Ready Paper Due: August 15, 2011 Early Registration Deadline (Authors only): May 01 to September 30, 2011 Late Registration Deadline (Authors only): October 01 to November 15, 2011 Participants Registration: May 01 to December 01, 2011 Conference Dates: December 11-14, 2011 For more details, please contact info(a)icitst.org

1 0

Casual tutor required, Digital Culture, U of Newcastle Australia
by Marj Kibby 10 May '11

10 May '11

Hi all, For my sins I have been seconded to a full time position improving the student experience. So I'm looking for someone to teach Digital Culture - a third year course in the BA that has students from a wide range of programs taking it as an elective. As taught in 2010 it has three modules. Module 1 The Information Revolution Module 2 Produsers, Creativity and Remix Culture Module 3 Social Networks & Online Communities Students undertake tasks relevant to the module. Set up an annotated bibliography in Delicious; edit specific Wikipedia pages; Post images to Flickr, download a classmates images and manipulate and re-post them; and so on. They then read related material and discuss the process in an online forum. Three assessible items: Contribution to the discussion A research project A production project using free online tools. As the course is online the tutor would not need to be located in Newcastle. However being able to have one or two f2f meetings would be an advantage. If interested please contact me privately marj.kibby(a)newcastle.edu.au Regards, Marj Associate Professor Marjorie Kibby Discipline Convenor: Film, Media and Cultural Studies School of Humanities and Social Science The University of Newcastle Callaghan NSW 2308 Australia Marj.Kibby(a)newcastle.edu.au +61 2 49216604

1 0

Using Social Media in High School Classroom
by Schmitz 10 May '11

10 May '11

Hello, I'm a high school teacher getting my MA in education technology. Just starting research on this topic and I wanted to check with all of you for possible leads on scholarly work or foundational research done in this area. Any and all help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Joseph Schmitz

1 0

Re: [Air-L] a question about privacy protection and copyright in Internet research
by Elizabeth Buchanan 10 May '11

10 May '11

Hey, all, I'm late in adding a couple of points about this discussion. From a US-human subjects perspectives (talking more regulatory), I disagree with Jeremy's hard line "if you are dealing with texts, you are not dealing with research subjects." I disagree with it from disciplinary and philosophical perspectives, but, that would take us down the road of another discussion. But--from a US regulatory perspective,(f) Human subject means a living individual about whom an investigator (whether professional or student) conducting research obtains (1) Data through intervention or interaction with the individual, or (2) Identifiable private information. So, I would argue that to patently reject "texts" as subjects is a risky choice and not a line that holds a lot of ethical weight; disciplinary specificity is very important for this discussion--these decisions are not, should no,t be based on only one set of criteria; with online research, as we know, there are community (or venue) norms, ethics, practices; disciplinary norms, ethics, practices; extant research ethics guidelines at the federal/country/commission level; and, increasingly, third party (eg, Facebook, etc etc) norms, "ethics", practices. All of those must be considered in making these decisions about research practices. Regarding the issue of public v private (which I agree with Michael is a fluid and moving dichotomy), again, from a regulatory perspective, there are boundaries: From 101 (b)(2) and 101(b)(4) in the CFR 45: Regarding online observation and exemptions for existing data, the issue of researcher "entry requirements" and "threshold of access" is significant. The OHRP standard is "what is readily ascertainable." If there are costs, restrictions, or other measures that prevent data from being "readily ascertainable, "the exemption does not apply and the data should be considered private. (This comes from a report in draft form, written with a colleague from the Office for Human Research Protections here in the US.If you are looking for more regulatory guidance, I can share this report). Recently, I gave a few talks with the lawyer who advises OHRP, and while they have issued no formal guidance on Internet research in particular, some interpretations have been presented. I can share our powerpoints on Internetresearchethics.org for those interested. Best regards, e. Elizabeth A. Buchanan, Ph.D. Endowed Chair in Ethics Director, Center for Applied Ethics University of Wisconsin-Stout PO Box 790 Menomonie, Wisconsin, 54751-0790 buchanane(a)uwstout.edu Principal Investigator, Internet Research Ethics Commons internetresearchethics.org (NSF Project # 0924604) elizabeth(a)internetresearchethics.org

3 3

a question about privacy protection and copyright in Internet research
by Elizabeth Buchanan 10 May '11

10 May '11

Jeremy, I know we rarely agree on these perspectives; what would help me understand your theoretical foundation for this stance--could you share an example, something from your research, for instance, where this line, this clear demarcation around text is evident? Could you describe how your methods engaged text and avoided subjects? I am just curious if I, from a totally different perspective, would see HS research involved? eb Principal Investigator, Internet Research Ethics Commons internetresearchethics.org (NSF Project # 0924604) elizabeth(a)internetresearchethics.org

1 0

The Story So Far: What We Know About the Business of Digital Journalism
by Richard Forno 10 May '11

10 May '11

Perhaps of interest to some here. --- rick http://www.cjr.org/the_business_of_digital_journalism/introduction.php The Story So Far: What We Know About the Business of Digital Journalism a report by Bill Grueskin Dean of Academic Affairs, Columbia Journalism School Ava Seave Principal, Quantum Media Adjunct Associate Professor, Columbia Business School Lucas Graves Ph.D. Candidate, Columbia Journalism School To download the complete version of "The Story So Far: What We Know About the Business of Digital Journalism," a new report on digital news economics from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism, click here. http://cjrarchive.org/img/posts/report/The_Story_So_Far.pdf

1 0

a question about privacy protection and copyright in Internet research
by Maria Eronen 10 May '11

10 May '11

Dear all, I am Maria, a PhD student from Finland and currently working with my thesis concerning how celebrity gossip leads to moral discussion on the Internet. I think I have some problems with research ethics. My research material consists of publicly available discussions from YouTube, various online newspapers and celebrity-related forums. Because I'm conducting linguistic analysis, it is reasonable to cite comments from those online discussions. One central topic I am focusing on is autobiographical moralizing (for example, discussion participants compare violence involving celebrities with their own-life experiences of violence, such as telling how their partner once hit them). This kind of material is what I categorize as sensitive and see it better not to refer to pseudonyms or usernames. I make it clear in my work that in some cases I see it better to stress privacy protection over copyright. However, I will mention the forum, where the comments come from, as a source (such as YouTube). I have personally contacted every one whose comments I see as sensitive. I want to use even senstive comments because they are valuable material from the point of view of the research. No one of them whom I contacted has said no. But of course, I'm not even sure whether they have seen the posts I sent to them (actually one replied to me and just wanted to know more about the study). In order to protect myself, I have not copied the whole comments, but left some parts of them out of the publication. The problem is now that by letting them know such a research they might see their posts in the dissertation and start a law case (because I don't authorize their words). The comments I cite without referring to the users as authors do not seem as pieces of creative art, but they are typical examples of online discussion. However, I'm a bit concerned because the posters whom I cite without permission, are American. The work itself will be published in Finland. Do you think this kind of privacy protection is a good reason to leave the usernames out? Am I too concerned or could this lead to serious consequences? Has anyone had similar experiences? I would be very thankful if you had time to help me, all the best, Maria Eronen

19 25

Virtual Immersive and Cyber Technologies — First Summer School
by Grainne Kirwan 09 May '11

09 May '11

The Institute of Art, Design and Technology (IADT) is delighted to announce "Virtual Immersive and Cyber Technologies — First Summer School on using the Internet for Behavioural Research". The Summer School has been funded under the IRCHSS 2010 Research Development Initiative Strand 3 — Summer School and will be held from June 13-17 in Dun Laoghaire, Dublin, Ireland. The theme of the summer school is broad. There will be an array of introductory talks and seminars on recent research into cybercrime, gaming, online consumer behaviour, learning online, e-governance, virtual reality and the social aspects of online behaviour. There will be lectures discussing the dark side of online behaviour with topics on Internet addiction, Online Child Pornography and Cyberbullying. The summer school will focus on the challenges and creative potential of using digital technologies for research into applied topics such as the psychology of social networking and the psychology of virtual reality. Practical workshops will be offered in the afternoons to demonstrate how the internet and immersive technologies such as the v- lab can be used for research purposes. Seminars, case studies and discussions on issues such as ethical considerations of using digital technologies for research will be highlighted. The summer school is open to all staff and students within the higher education sector but places are strictly limited. There are also some places reserved for representatives from industry. Further information and registration for the event is available at www.cyberpsychology.ie<http://www.cyberpsychology.ie> Queries can be directed to grainne.kirwan(a)iadt.ie<mailto:grainne.kirwan@iadt.ie> Dr. Gráinne Kirwan Lecturer in Cyberpsychology School of Creative Technologies Institute of Art, Design and Technology, Kill Avenue Dun Laoghaire Co. Dublin Rep. of Ireland Phone: 01 - 2394936 International: + 353 1 2394936 Facebook: MSc Cyberpsychology Twitter: MScCyberpsych Linked in: Cyberpsychology Ireland -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- IADT Disclaimer. This e-mail and any other items transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom they are addressed. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, disclose, distribute, copy, print or relay on this e-mail. If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected this e-mail, please notify the author by return email or inform Dun Laoghaire Institute of Art | Design | Technology's (IADT) Information Communication Technology Office on 01 2144770 or mailto:support@iadt.ie Any views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of IADT. IADT does not guarantee that this e-mail is free from viruses, worms or the like. Please undertake your own checks. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: [Air-L] a question about privacy protection and copyright in Internet research
by stu＠texifter.com 09 May '11

09 May '11

I agree with Michael, there are few truly clear lines, as depicted in this animation on Facebook: [1]http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/7660891/markzism-tyranny-or-transcen dence Another example: this list. Is it published? Is it public? When I quote Michael & Jeremy among others on the company blog, from the list, is that OK? [2]http://blog.texifter.com/index.php/2011/05/07/twitter-and-history-ma rch-on/ ~Stu -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Air-L] a question about privacy protection and copyright in Internet research From: Michael Zimmer <[3]zimmerm(a)uwm.edu> Was this information "published"? Is it really meant to be "public"? Did I consent to it being used? Is my ignorance about how Facebook now works justification for harvesting and using the information? References 1. http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/7660891/markzism-tyranny-or-transcendence 2. http://blog.texifter.com/index.php/2011/05/07/twitter-and-history-march-on 3. mailto:zimmerm@uwm.edu

1 0