- Air-L - lists.aoir.org

CFP OurMedia Conference [new deadline]
by Adilson Cabral 16 May '04

16 May '04

Hope to see you there. Adilson Cabral OURMedia / NUESTROSMedios / Nossos Meios IV: Building Communication Societies An International Conference July 22-25, 2004 Porto Alegre, Brazil ::::CALL FOR PROPOSALS:::: DEADLINE: May 21, 2004 OURMedia/NuestrosMedios is an international network of more than 270 academics and activists -- researchers, practitioners and advocates working in more than forty countries to strengthen media and information/communication technologies (ICTs) that support social justice, human rights, community autonomy and grassroots empowerment. Our work spans many fields: community media, independent media, radical media, citizens media ... grassroots networking, telecommunications policy, indymedia activism, cultural arts, communications theory, social-movement research, sociology, anthropology, cultural studies, development communication and communication for social change. Our annual meeting is a time to learn from each other and to strengthen our analyses, strategies, collaborations and campaigns. We invite you to join us. Presentations and participatory sessions at OM IV will be translated on site into English/Spanish/Portuguese and also fully documented. Papers, reports and other written or multimedia materials provided by presenters will be posted to the OURMedia website, which is becoming one of the most comprehensive online repositories of research and commentary on grassroots media and ICTs. Several publication projects such as books and special-edition journals are currently being planned and others may develop to feature the presentations, discussions and projects produced at and for OM IV. This announcement includes: ** Types of Sessions ** Topic Areas ** Selection Criteria ** How to Apply ** More about the Conference (including costs & fees) ** Preliminary Conference Schedule =============== TYPES OF SESSIONS The Conference Planning Committee is seeking proposals for two types of sessions: 1) PRESENTATIONS: moderated panels, paper presentations, multimedia presentations, small roundtable debates/discussions, performances 2) PARTICIPATORY SESSIONS: facilitated discussion groups, workshops, strategic working groups, action planning meetings In addition, the first and last days of the OURMedia/NuestrosMedios IV Conference will feature FIELD TRIPS to local Brazilian grassroots media and ICT projects, advocacy campaigns and popular education centers as well as an active POLYMEDIA LAB which will be open for the full four days of the conference. Based on previous "polymedia labs" at the European Social Forum (Florence 2002), the We Seize! WSIS Counter-Summit (Geneva 2003) and the Foro de Acá (Montevideo 2003) the OURMedia Polymedia Lab will be a multimedia space for experimentation, creation, collaboration and skill-sharing. Workshops, projects and exhibits will explore autonomous and community uses of video, audio, Internet and other traditional and new media technologies. The Polymedia Lab is collectively organized by participants and open to all. Anyone interested in participating in the Polymedia Lab planning should visit: http://docs.indymedia.org/view/Global/OurPolymediaLab ====================== TOPIC AREAS For Presentations and Participatory Sessions, the Conference Planning Committee is seeking proposals that address one or more of the following topics: 1) Connecting Research and Advocacy for Citizens' Media --data and research findings, advocacy strategies and research/evaluation methods that can help demonstrate to policymakers, funders and civil society leaders the vital importance of grassroots, community-based, autonomous, participatory media and ICT policies, systems and projects -- the research needs of advocates, practitioners and policymakers -- overcoming barriers to advocacy-oriented or participatory research in academia -- opportunities and methods for research that can support advocacy as well as practitioner self-evaluation -- the nexus between academic research and community aspirations -- pragmatic projects for equity, social inclusion and policy realignment -- ICT and media policy and advocacy campaigns as empowering tools for future initiatives -- tactical, practice-based, or other 'non-traditional' research methods and models -- interactive media and how it links to collaborative and participatory research and practice 2) "Best Practices" and "Notable Failures" -- stories and lessons from survivors, successes and disasters; transformed, extinct or emerging citizens' media and grassroots networking projects, media/ICT advocacy and policy campaigns, researcher-practitioner collaborations. What specifically we can learn from them to incorporate into our practice as researchers, advocates and media practitioners? -- praxis models for engaging ICTs and media and grassroots activities, community participation or mobilization -- lessons from other social movements, past campaigns or local examples that relate to current advocacy efforts for "communication rights," "media democracy," "free speech," "media diversity" and other goals. 3) Current Policy Issues and Implications: -- discussions on current media/ICT policy issues and institutions such as WSIS, WTO, FTAA, WIPO, Convention on Cultural Diversity and local/regional policy and regulatory issues -- specific current or emerging political/military/commercial threats to free, diverse, autonomous and participatory media -- specific current or emerging opportunities to advance communication rights, information rights, freedom of speech -- considerations of current media/ICT policy campaigns in local, regional or global contexts -- evaluations of existing policy models at local, regional or world levels -- the politics of media production and distribution processes 4) The Evolution of OURMedia and Project Working Sessions -- opportunities for OM to advance academic/advocacy/practitioner collaborations -- specific ways that network members can help each other -- research, workshops, strategies and campaigns to further develop OM as a network and political force -- workshops or discussions to address future goals, organizational structures, processes and activities for the network, next steps and short & long term future of OURMedia We are very interested in session proposals that have a specific intended action outcome, such as working sessions designed to initiate collaborative projects with the goal of producing actual tools such as: - a guide to self evaluation for citizens media/advocacy groups - guidelines for practitioner/advocate academic collaborations - bibliographies of key research for media/ICT advocacy - media education/media literacy curricula including a citizens' media perspective - collectively generated maps of the relationships among media and ICTpolicy issues - booklets or pamphlets on current policy issues and how they relate to community media and ICTs - public education materials (flyers, articles, posters, multimedia) about citizens media/ICT and policy issues - action plans, working groups and groundwork for participation in a regional/global policy forum such as WSIS II or WTO, Social Forums and other movement processes or activist campaigns. **Note: we are also specifically seeking research proposals that seek to focus on the OURMedia network as a subject. The team from CIMA together with Dr. Janice Windborne are planning to conduct a research survey of the OURMedia membership and are actively looking for additional academic partners interested in contributing to this work. This is an excellent opportunity for academics interested in studying networks. If you are interested, please contact [ liza @ mediaactioncenter.org] *** ====================== SELECTION CRITERIA The Program Working Group will be most interested in proposals that: * address the overall conference objectives and suggested topic areas * incorporate group discussion and/or workshop-style interactivity * reflect on the challenges and opportunities for research to support advocacy and/or practitioners * model participatory research and/or presentation techniques and methods * engage specific current issues of concern, policy/advocacy campaigns, or debates in the field * feature people speaking from their own experiences, self-representing and/or sharing local knowledge; presenter teams that include both academics and a representative of their "subject" group will be considered favorably * are designed to appeal to a cross-disciplinary and international audience * include a strategy for how documentation/dissemination or other follow up from the discussion or presentation can help advance OM goals and conference objectives * consider the strategic development of OM as a network, and/or potential OM projects as part of the focus/conclusion of the presentation or discussion We will select a mix of proposals with consideration for: * geographic, ethnic, professional, gender and age diversity * a balance of practitioner perspectives and academic perspectives * a balance of presentation sessions and group discussion/workshop sessions, with a preference for participatory sessions over panels and speeches * perspectives and voices from traditionally or frequently marginalized groups and communities * relevance to current policy debates, advocacy campaigns and specific political/economic conditions * fun, uplifting and inspirational approaches (eg: games, experiential exercises, multimedia, etc) ====================== HOW TO APPLY Please prepare a short proposal to be submitted by email. Your proposal must include: * Name(s) of presenters, panelists or session leaders * Contact information (organization, address, phone/fax, email) * Short bio (90 words or less) for each participant named, including country where they are based, institutional affiliation, nature of their work and/or field of expertise or study * Description/abstract of your session (no more than 500 words) that includes: title, topic to be covered and detailed description of format or outline of the session plan. Please be sure to reference the relevant topic areas as listed in this announcement and to indicate why you think this session meets our selection criteria. Please indicate if you are already an OURMedia member and if you have attended past OM conferences. ***DEADLINE*** Proposals must be submitted by FRIDAY, MAY 21, 2004 22:00 GMT (10pm GMT) *If you submitted an earlier paper, abstract or proposal, we invite you to re-submit as described above or simply to send us supplementary information indicating how your proposed session fits the Conference topics and criteria. Send complete proposal as email text, Microsoft Word, PDF or RTF document to Aliza Dichter, Program Working Group Chair at om2004 @ ourmedianet.org. =================================== MORE INFORMATION, COSTS AND FEES OURMedia IV: "Building Communication Societies" will take place in Porto Alegre, Brazil, July 22-25, 2004 as a pre-conference to the IAMCR, the International Association of Media and Communications Research. We are currently fundraising to cover essential conference costs. We are hoping to raise additional funds to enable us to subsidize the travel and lodging costs of some participants. However, it is unlikely we will be able to provide full travel subsidies for anyone. Participants are encouraged to acquire their own funding for transportation/food/lodging if possible. Scholarship information will be available after April 20 on the OURMedia website. The Conference full registration fee is $150 USD for the two days of conference sessions and $150 USD for the two days of field trips, for a total of $300 USD. If you are not receiving funding from an academic organization, large NGO, grantmaking foundation or other institution, and not otherwise able to raise the funds to do so, then we will waive the registration fee. However, please note that registration fees will contribute towards essential conference costs such as space, translators, technology and documentation as well as supplement our budget for the field trips. We have a very tight budget for a very ambitious agenda and we need your support. If you are also planning on attending IAMCR, some grants are available for participants from low-income countries. Please visit: http://www.pucrs.br/famecos/iamcr/textos/grants.htm and be sure to apply before April 30. For more information about OM IV please first visit our web page at: http://www.ourmedianet.org/om2004 If you still have additional questions after visiting the webpage, please contact us by email: [ omiv @ ourmedianet.org ] ================================== PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE SCHEDULE: (subject to change) Day 1, July 22- Thursday -- Registration -- Opening meeting -- Field trips (To Be Announced) -- Polymedia Lab Day 2, July 23- Friday -- Registration -- Welcome Plenary: A Tribute to the Legacy of Paulo Freire -- Morning Sessions: Presentations and Strategic Discussions -- Afternoon Sessions: Presentations and Strategic Discussions -- All Day: Polymedia Lab -- Evening: informal dinners and self-organized meetings Day 3, July 24- Saturday -- Morning Sessions: Presentations and Strategic Discussions -- Afternoon Sessions: Presentations and Strategic Discussions -- All Day: Polymedia Lab -- Evening: closing plenary for conference meeting sessions Day 4, July 25- Sunday -- Field Trips (TBA) -- Polymedia Lab -- Space for self-organized meetings available

1 0

RE: Re: [Air-l] online bibliography application to share scientific literature and citations thru web browser?
by Julio Meneses Naranjo 16 May '04

16 May '04

Hi elijah, *check out bibster - an application of semantic web tech to *p2p *bibliographic management. * *http://bibster.semanticweb.org/index.htm * *looks pretty neat to me, though i confess that i haven't *used it (yet). Nice try! I've been having a look and it seems to be a good app to share bibliography without a server in the middle. I will keep on eye on it, although it's not solving the scenario i'm in. Thank you very much anyway :-) _________________________________________________________ Julio Meneses Naranjo Investigador del IN3 Doctorando del Programa de Sociedad de la Información del IN3 Universitat Oberta de Catalunya Estudis de Psicologia i Ciències de l'Educació Avinguda Tibidabo 39-43 08035 Barcelona (Spain) jmenesesn(a)uoc.edu

1 0

online bibliography application to share scientific literature and citations thru web browser?
by Julio Meneses Naranjo 16 May '04

16 May '04

Hi there, Just a quick question looking for some information about some online references database software. We are all 'Internet Researchers' (just remembering the recent discussion about that) and probably some of you are working on my scenario). I'm trying to organize a shared bibliography for my research team and my first thought was to develop something on PHP / MySQL. I need something to read/edit/add bibliography thru the web (some kind of users management, blah, blah, blah), but I'm pretty sure there should be something available (maybe GNU, maybe not). I have been browsing some PHP scripts repositories and no success at all, so I went to sourceforce.net and found some interesting things. However, most of them are not what I'm looking. The one I found that maybe could be used with some modifications was netref (have a look here if you are interested: http://refbase.sourceforge.net/) Well, now the question is: do you know/use any server application (Unix, PHP & MySQL) to manage scientific literature and citations? Clients like Reference Manager and so on are clients and don't let me to share the database. Well, Reference Manager has something to do that at its latest version but it's not what I'm looking for (it's windows, not UNIX, and then I should let my computer always on and it shouldn't be available outside our own network (I need to give support to people at the research group that are not based at our University). Any help / hints / suggestions are really welcome. I really don't want to miss something interesting before choosing one. Thank you very much in advance :-) _________________________________________________________ Julio Meneses Naranjo Investigador del IN3 Doctorando del Programa de Sociedad de la Información del IN3 Universitat Oberta de Catalunya Estudis de Psicologia i Ciències de l'Educació Avinguda Tibidabo 39-43 08035 Barcelona (Spain) jmenesesn(a)uoc.edu

4 3

Emotional Content in Weblogs and News Sites Online
by Gerd Stodiek 16 May '04

16 May '04

I am in the process of writing my Master thesis on a comparative study of weblogs and online news sites. One of my measures is emotional content. I want to find out whether weblogs offer more emotional content than online news sites based in print, broadcasting, and the web. I looked at an email and information richness study by Panteli (2000) and there I discovered that emoticons, capital letters or abbreviations were replacements for shortcomings with respect to face-2-face emotions. I am not sure if these measures suffice to make inferences from text in weblogs or online news sites? Does anyone know of measuring tools in online text communication that would make sense in light of this study? Kind Regards Gerd Stodiek ISNM International School of New Media University of Lübeck Gerd Stodiek M.Sc. Digital Media Program http://www.isnm.de Willy-Brandt-Allee 31a 23554 Lübeck, Germany

4 3

Fwd: Inscriptions open for CIRN Colloquium and Community Technology' Prato, Italy, 29 Sept-1 Oct 2004 and Community Technology' Prato, Italy, 29 Sept-1 Oct 2004
by Michel J. Menou 15 May '04

15 May '04

This is a forwarded message From: larry Stillman <larrys(a)vicnet.net.au> To: <communityinformatics(a)vancouvercommunity.net> Date: Friday, May 14, 2004, 3:00:22 PM Subject: [ciresearchers] Registrations now open for 'Sustainability and Community Technology' Prato, Italy, 29 Sept-1 Oct 2004 ===8<==============Original message text=============== Dear Colleague, The Community Informatics Research Network, Inc. invites your participation as a delegate at the 2004 Conference and Colloquium, 'Sustainability and Community Technology'. Information is available at http://www.ciresearch.net/conferences/index.php?cf=4/. 'Sustainability' has been identified as a key and controversial issue in community networking, and the purpose of the conference is to explore all its dimensions, resulting in a communiqué developed through plenary sessions, as well as further activities of the CIRN network. The event will be of interest to researchers, policymakers, and practitioners. There will be keynotes, panel sessions (with about 40 presentations from around the world), plenaries, and workshops on Community Informatics Education and Multisite-Multistate Research. There will also be a doctoral colloquium. Of course, there will also be opportunities for networking and a full social program at the Monash University Centre Prato, located in a magnificent Palazzo in the heart of beautiful small Tuscan city, close to Florence and transport connections. Please register soon to ensure a place for yourselves and colleagues. The number of participants will be limited to ensure effective interaction and for practical reasons. Registrations can be made electronically, with separate accommodation and transport information on the registration website. Early hotel reservations are suggested. If you wish to join CIRN and obtain a members discount, please do so by June 1 in order to be a voting member at the AGM. More information about CIRN can be found at www.ciresearch.net. The conference is being held with the generous advice and support of the following institutions and businesses: * Monash University, Australia * Claremont Graduate University, USA * National Research Council Canada - Institute for Information Technology * Queensland University of Technology, Australia * Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand * Intel * Public Knowledge Project, University of British Columbia Please forward this email to interested colleagues. -------------------------------- Larry Stillman for the Organising Committee CCNR, Monash University 61 3 9903 1801 www.ccnr.net www.webstylus.net ===8<===========End of original message text===========

1 0

Spring 2004 executive committee report
by Nancy Baym 14 May '04

14 May '04

May, 2004 Report of the a.o.i.r. executive committee Prepared by Nancy Baym AoIR Executive Committee President: Nancy Baym Vice-President: Matthew Allen Secretary: Ulla Bunz Treasurer: Benjamin Bates Open Seats: Radhika Gajjala and Annette Markham Appointed Seats: Monica Murero and Randolph Kluver Student Seat: Leslie Tkach-Kawasaki Publications Officers: Jeremy Hunsinger and Charlie Breindahl Past President (ex-officio): Steve Jones 2004 Conference Chair: Kate O'Riordan Ethics Working Group Chair: Charles Ess 1. Introduction & General (Baym) This is the place to find out what's going on in the association. It's long, it's not always thrilling, but it's always the best way for you to keep up so please read it! Our 24/7 discussions of the month on the executive committee mailing list are summarized in Ulla Bunz's section of the report. Read on... 2. Executive Officers' Reports 2.1 President (Baym) 2.1.1 Planning on Sussex continues to go well and we are beginning to plan the 2005 conferences and beyond. We are moving to a new conference management system after 2004 as discussed below. A new working group to examine whether or not AoIR should start a journal and related issues is being formed. Our publications officers are working to overhaul the members web site. Our first AoIR Internet Research Annual has been published by Peter Lang. In her report below, Leslie mentions the need for non-English AoIR materials; if you are interested in translating any of our resources for non-English speaking audiences, please contact her. As always, if you know people who you think should be part of AoIR, please let them know we are here. And if you are an air-l subscriber but not a member, please consider joining -- it's not expensive and there are many benefits. And finally, if you have any skills you'd like to offer the association, we are an all-volunteer organization and are only able to accomplish as much as our volunteers are willing to commit. 2.2 Vice President (Allen) 2.2.1 I have been working with Mia to finalise vol2 of the IR annual. 2.3 Secretary (Bunz) 2.3.1 Counted votes, made picky edits, retrieved archive info for discussions, and kept relatively quiet otherwise for the past couple of months. February 11 - May 11, 2004 This month (or better, these months) on the Executive Listserve: - The exec discussed submission statistics and how the location of the conference influences the cultural backgrounds of attendees. Such issues are important for deciding on future conference locations. (Location for 2005 will be announced in Sussex.) The exec discussed a possible conference location for 2006. The first tentative contact with the potential host site will be made within the next month. In the meantime, host proposals for 2006 are welcome any time to Nancy Baym. - The exec is in the process of changing the way conference management is being handled. Two proposals from two conference management teams were reviewed and discussed at length. The decision (10 in favor, 1 abstain) was that in 2005, Virginia Tech will provide basic conference management services/planning for the AoIR conference (Please note, the conference is *not* at Virginia Tech. Instead, the university provides a conference management service for hire. Please note also that one of the appeals of VT is that they are willing and able to manage conferences outside of the United Statest). If both AoIR and VT feel that they work well together, these services may be retained for future conferences. This means that things like hotel negotiations, printing of programs, registration, etc. will be taken care of by the VT management team, leading to standardization of certain procedures that have evolved within AoIR. This more or less eliminates the "local host" role that has existed for all conferences including the upcoming 2004 conference. While we still encourage a local liaison (like we will have in 2005), this local person would not have to deal with many of the issues that recur every year, but would be more of a "local liaison." Some early planning for 2005 is already going on (i.e., hotel reservation, book exhibitors). This reflects a sense that we can stop re-inventing the wheel, not a sense that our local hosts have been anything less than spectacular in the accomplishment of their task! - The exec is currently in the process of deciding on a potential program chair for 2005. - The current conference management group, composed of three exec members, the local host, and the program chair, has been working on details for the Sussex conference such as budgets, local coordinating, reviewing, etc. This work is ongoing and leads to a smooth conference experience. So far this work was performed by the local host who sent feedback to the exec, but in an attempt to work towards the 2005 conference management approach, the temporary work group was formed. The conference planning guide is being changed accordingly. - A lack of conference proposal reviewers resulted in drafting a call for reviewers which was sent to the AoIR members-only Listserve. The response was overwhelming (in the most positive way) and many additional reviewers were recruited. Reviewing, under the direction of program chair Sheizaf Rafaeli, has concluded and notifications have since been sent. For the future, we would like to encourage both AoIR members and non-members to continue volunteering if they are willing to review proposals. The next call for reviewers will be in early 2005. - A charge for a new working group to discuss issues relating to AoIR and the development of (or liaisoning with) one or more journals was created and posted to the AoIR members-only Listserve. Volunteers still interested in participating in this working group should contact Radhika Gajjala. A report of this workgroup will be presented in Sussex. If you are interested in this topic, but not currently a member, consider joining aoir! - The exec is continuing its efforts to find funds to support travel to AoIR conferences for graduate students and/or members from disadvantaged nations. There may be some support for 2004, but we hope to begin modestly subsidizing selected people by 2005. 2.4 Treasurer (Bates) 2.4.1. Ben has been managing memberships. 2.5 Open Seats (Gajjala, Markham) 2.5.1 Gajjala: Nothing reported though she's been very active in discussion and agreed to serve as liaison for the journal working group. 2.5.2 Markham: Nothing reported though she too has been very active in discusison. 2.6 Appointed Seats (Murero, Kluver) 2.6.1 Murero: I have actively participated in all the discussions within air-exec (see general report). I have done some revision work (interesting and unexpected) and I am doing quite a lot of work for the organizational part of our conference in Sussex, particularly on the budget analysis (costs, incomes) and calculations, formulas, and more. If my boss reads this, please be aware that I am doing all of this during my free time :-)) ! 2.6.2 Kluver: I have just been participating in online discussions, and trying to raise the visibility of AoIR in Asia. 2.7 Student Seat (Tkach-Kawaski) 2.7.1 * Did reviewing for Aoir 5.0 (Sussex). * Continued to assemble potential content for graduate student section of the web-site. * Discussed possible ways to increase Aoir's presence among graduate students in Japan (specifically) and SE Asia (in general) among seminar group members. Key points identified so far in regard to the third point are: --> Availability of information in languages other than English. --> Availability of programs, scholarships, linkages (for example, exchange programs) with other universities, especially those universities with which Japanese universities currently have exchange programs. 2.8 Publications Officers (Hunsinger, Breindahl) 2.8.1 Hunsinger: worked on the conference worked on the server broke and fixed things irritated charlie and others [Nancy's note: Jeremy is understating the amount of work he does for us!] 2.8.2 Breindahl: I have been and still am involved in the discussions about the organization's web presence and I'm still busy discarding thousands of spam mails. 2.9 Past-President (Jones): I've spent most of my AoIR time making arrangements for the 2005 conference and working with the conference management agency. There have also been some loose threads to tie up from the 2003 conference. I also did our taxes. 2.10 2004 Conference Chair (Kate O'Riordan) 2.10.1 Kate's too busy making sure all goes well in Sussex to pen an update right now. Planning is going wonderfully and we anticipate a great event. Acceptances and rejections have been sent out, and we hope to see many of you in Sussex this fall! 2.11 AoIR Ethics Working Group (Charles Ess, Chair) 2.11.1 While there has been no response to our call for interesting and instructive accounts of constructive engagements with IRBs and equivalent oversight authorities - there certainly has been a constructive and engaging discussion of online research ethics on the aoir list. As always, suggestions and comments for improving the ethics document and its resources are welcome and encouraged.

1 0

BMJ Article on health related virtual communities / cmc-focus issue
by Azy Barak 14 May '04

14 May '04

My experience of several years with a variety of support groups has been quite different from what was reported in this "mega analysis." Moreover, most of the literature I know (see http://construct.haifa.ac.il/~azy/refsupp.htm) show the opposite. Azy > > I wonder if you have taken a look at the new BMJ, which has a theme of cmc > in healthcare. > > http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/328/7449/1143 > > and particularly, the following: > > Health related virtual communities and electronic support groups: systematic > review of the effects of online peer to peer interactions. Gunther > Eysenbach, John Powell, Marina Englesakis, Carlos Rizo, and Anita Stern. > BMJ 2004 328: 1166-0. > > I don't know if any members of this list are working in the area of > healthcare-related cmc, particularly peer-to-peer, but I'd certainly be > interested in knowing if that's the case. My work to date has been with a > large forum (200,000 members) whose intent is smoking cessation. I'd be > very interested to see reactions to this article, which is available > full-text through the BMJ website. > > Carol Perryman

1 0

ethnography and ethics
by bakera＠ohiou.edu 14 May '04

14 May '04

To Jon (and all interested) On your "love of truth" argument I think this has been wisely addressed by Lori, Ed, and Jennifer. Temperamentally, I prefer overt research, and happily, this type gains easier approval from IRB's, and has advantages that Lori points out for getting at certain meanings through interviewing. I would agree with Ed who says there could be cases more amenable to covert research, and add that I believe we as researchers usually engage informally in covert observation before deciding to research a particular area. On this point: "Privacy and public are social constructs and vague and often contradictory. This is simply a 'fact' as far as i'm concerned, and i'm a bit surprised that some people don't percieve it -" I am not sure we don't perceive the vagueness, and yet there are other dimensions of this area to explore. For example, does it matter how public or private the participants perceive the setting, and also, how do we resolve the almost inevitable conflict between the member's desire for privacy and the researcher's desire for data? I do agree that there is no one answer to these questions, and yet I believe they are worth pursuing. --andrea baker (andee)

1 0

RE: [Air-l] ethnography and ethics
by Kendall, Lori 14 May '04

14 May '04

Ed raises a good point about people's accounts of what things mean, and I do agree with him on this. It's one of the reasons I think that interviews alone are often inadequate. You need both observations of behavior *and* discussions with people about their behavior. When I ask people what things mean to them, it doesn't mean that I leave the analysis up to them. It just means that I include their own accounts. Sometimes these accounts tell us more about what people think *should* matter than about what *does* matter. As for people behaving differently when observed: Sure, although not as much as my students believe. (Many, if not most, of my students also believe that everybody lies on surveys and that no one will tell you the truth in interviews either. Do other people get these reactions, or do I have the most cynical students on the planet?) You will find out one set of things when you covertly observe people. You may find out another set of things when you overtly observe people. Which of those sets of things is more valuable for your research depends on what you're analyzing, but in general, I think you get more information by researching overtly. A lot of it comes down to how you do your analysis. In that analysis, you have to take account of your position as researcher and how that has affected what you've observed, regardless of whether your observation was known or not. Lori

1 0

RE: [Air-l] ethnography and ethics
by Kendall, Lori 14 May '04

14 May '04

I'm glad Jennifer has returned to the point about whether covert research yields better data. It's something that has been bothering me since the inception of this conversation. This comes up every time I teach Research Methods (which I do every year). When teaching, I attribute the belief that "only covert research yields good data" to the far greater familiarity my students have with quantitative methods and with the fact that culturally in the U.S. the understood model of SCIENCE means experimental methods, in which as many aspects of the research project are as tightly controlled as possible. The objection raised by my students is usually that if people know I'm observing them, they will behave differently, and therefore I won't really find out "the truth." A similar (but sort of reversed) reaction is contained in ET's original post on this topic. He wrote (on May 5, and I was surprised -- I was sure we'd been talking about this much longer!): > "To me, if one is studying > humanity one should be part of it, exposed to the same experiences, > feeling the full swing of their emotions through their research. > The obvious criticism of such an approach would be that one is too > involved and therefore potentially producing inaccurate research. > But is such research any less accurate than the arms length - dont get > involved - approach where the participants are wary of the watcher?" I have several responses to this. First, coming in as researchers with a research agenda, we can never be participants in exactly the same way as the people we are studying. Most participants presumably have one agenda in participating (although in some settings, other participants may also have more than one agenda, such as a journalist participating in a listserv and using posts from the listserv -- overtly or covertly -- as fodder for a weekly column). Researchers (at least in the type of research I do: participant-observation or ethnographic) always have two (at least!) agendas -- a split self. We are both observers, with all kinds of reasons why we want to observe -- and we are participants. That being the case, you can actually be *more* of an immersed participant overtly than you can covertly. Covert research requires you to always hold something back, as you hide your second agenda. Overt research is therefore *less* "arms-length," not more. Second, being an overt researcher allows you to ask questions. Some of these questions would be considered rude, weird, or out of place from a "regular" participant, but are acceptable from someone new to the culture or studying the culture. Without the ability to ask questions and achieve greater understanding of what's going on, you risk completely misinterpreting things you observe. I have an example from my research of such a misinterpretation (from not asking a question), but it's kind of long to explain, so if people are interested I can email or maybe post it later. Third, I'm personally interested not just in what people do and say but in what these things *mean* to them, in what they *think*. While you can observe some physical cues for emotional reactions (not available in many online situations), a better way to find out what things mean to people is to ask them. This can provide for much richer, more nuanced, and yes even *better* data. An example of this is in my book Hanging Out in the Virtual Pub. The people I was studying had read a short piece I'd published in an anthology and we were discussing the accuracy (or lack thereof) of my observations. So because I was open about my research, and shared the "results" of that research with participants as I went, I was able ultimately to present (a) an excerpt of online text, (b) my own analysis of what that text means, and (c) further text discussion amongst participants about what *they* think the text means (with considerable disagreements between me and them and amongst them). I believe this provides a much better picture of their culture, and it gave me further insights and yielded an entirely new avenue of analysis for me. As Nancy mentioned earlier, there may be some situations in which people would so object to being studied that being an overt researcher would not provide you with an advantage. But in most situations I think it does. When you add that to the ethical considerations, I think covert research can only be justified in a very limited set of cases. Lori ________________________________ Lori Kendall Assistant Professor of Sociology Purchase College-SUNY lori.kendall(a)purchase.edu

2 1