Two thoughts to Rod's post. First, upon what basis can a researcher declare that Americans who use the Internet give up their right to say no to being researched? Just because Americans are early adopters does not mean that they experience all of their interactions online as public. The premise that users of the Internet implicitly consent to be researched is unfounded. Not all Americans are savvy Internet users who understand how the Internet actually works. Even if they did, that does not entail that they have consented to be researched. Second, it's not that "I" feel uncomfortable recording conversations. That's not my point. This conversation is about social ontology and ethics and not my personal psychology. My point is that as researchers we cannot carte blanche declare whatever we see online as "public" and therefore researchable. Sincerely, ~Jenny Stromer-Galley -----Original Message-----
From: air-l-admin@aoir.org [mailto:air-l-admin@aoir.org] On Behalf Of Rod Carveth Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 12:59 PM To: air-l@aoir.org Subject: RE: [Air-l] Google is watching !
Jenny,
<snip>
If a researcher wants to record the interactions of a GLBT support group, anonymity is pretty easy to insure -- just don't reveal the names (or any other identity revealing information) in the public dissemination of the data.
<snip>
This is not the same as the interactions of Internet users in the United States in an online support group. For example, people can lurk relatively anonymously in many groups, so the total number of people involved in the interaction is not known (unlike F2F). Second, the interactions are written down and can be archived, so there's a record of what is being said. In other words, participants in an online support group know that the nature of their communication is different than in F2F interaction. And, by agreeing to participate in an online forum, they are inherently agreeing to deal with those differences -- basically, they have given implied consent to having their interactions collected, analyzed, interpreted, etc.
Thus, given that participants' anonymity can easily be insured, and that interactants by their very participation have given their consent to their comments to be used as data, then I don't see anything ethically wrong with using their postings as data.
Jenny, if you are uncomfortable recording those conversations as data, then you can choose not to. I just happen to believe that those who choose to are not violating any ethical principles here.
Rod