Friends, This conversation hinges on the concept of fairness. We are all probing to find the boundary between fairness and unfairness. While considering the data we find, perhaps we should also be aware of "the tyranny of the majority" and "reciprocity." Paying members of AoIR are unlikely to do their research near the boundaries of the discipline of Internet Research. They represent the mainstream. For every mainstream member there are likely to be many more that are from other disciplines whose research concerns touch mainstream interests only tangentially or in highly specialized areas. My research for instance involves the behavior of researchers, not the majority of Internet users. I am also not very interested in synchronous methods. Yet, when discussion threads or papers mentioned coincide or approach my area of interest, I need that information! There are other ways of contributing to this community of practice beside joining the Association of Internet Researchers. When I and other responsible observers working at or beyond the boundaries of Internet Research are rewarded with information from your community we tend to reciprocate by telling you how our research informs yours. Perhaps reciprocity needs to be part of the metric for access. -- Charlie Hendricksen, Ph.D. veritas@u.washington.edu "Information technology structures human relationships." "Models relate concepts."
Charlie Hendricksen wrote:
Paying members of AoIR are unlikely to do their research near the boundaries of the discipline of Internet Research. They represent the mainstream.
I question this characterization of paying members. My experience from talking to people at our conferences and throughout the formation and growth of this association has been that members: feel marginalized within their institutional disciplines because of their interest in the internet think that their particular angle on internet studies -- be it literary, economic, artistic, you name it -- is not adequately represented within aoir also do research that is not just about the internet and which is more closely aligned with our more traditional disciplines, and we also have to think about framing the net research that we do in ways that speak to those disciplines. In short, I think this association works because we are all at boundaries, the field of internet research is comprised of intersecting boundaries. Though there may be some strong themes that characterize contemporary net research, I don't think there is a "mainstream" nor even a "discipline." Nancy ________________________________________________________ Nancy Baym http://www.ku.edu/home/nbaym Communication Studies, University of Kansas 102 Bailey Hall, 1440 Jayhawk Blvd., Lawrence, KS 66045, USA Association of Internet Researchers: http://aoir.org
Friends, Nancy's comments make my case that Internet Research is a discipline, or failing that, at least is rapidly becoming one. There are dedicated journals, a flagship organization, a listserver supporting the community, a code of ethics, and people who call themselves Internet Researchers. More comments below. Nancy Baym wrote:
Charlie Hendricksen wrote:
Paying members of AoIR are unlikely to do their research near the boundaries of the discipline of Internet Research. They represent the mainstream.
I question this characterization of paying members. My experience from talking to people at our conferences and throughout the formation and growth of this association has been that members:
feel marginalized within their institutional disciplines because of their interest in the internet
Certainly! That is the reason new disciplines are formed. I am sure that many members feel, or even have been told, that their 'out of the mainstream' research is hurting their career in the home discipline.
think that their particular angle on internet studies -- be it literary, economic, artistic, you name it -- is not adequately represented within aoir
That will come in time. I welcome any dialog with colleagues who would like to study research teams who operate ON the Internet. Certainly distributed research teams are worthy of becoming subjects of Internet Research.
also do research that is not just about the internet and which is more closely aligned with our more traditional disciplines, and we also have to think about framing the net research that we do in ways that speak to those disciplines.
Until there are recognized departments of Internet Studies, the home disciplines must be served. To ignore the hand that feeds you is not recommended. Of course we all owe our research interests to established disciplines as well as to Internet Research. The value we add to Internet Studies as representatives of our current home disciplines is that our research is tied to an established body of knowledge.
In short, I think this association works because we are all at boundaries, the field of internet research is comprised of intersecting boundaries. Though there may be some strong themes that characterize contemporary net research, I don't think there is a "mainstream" nor even a "discipline."
Yes, this week.
Nancy ________________________________________________________ Nancy Baym http://www.ku.edu/home/nbaym Communication Studies, University of Kansas 102 Bailey Hall, 1440 Jayhawk Blvd., Lawrence, KS 66045, USA Association of Internet Researchers: http://aoir.org
_______________________________________________ Air-l mailing list Air-l@aoir.org http://www.aoir.org/mailman/listinfo/air-l
-- Charlie Hendricksen, Ph.D. veritas@u.washington.edu "Information technology structures human relationships." "Models relate concepts."
participants (2)
-
Charlie Hendricksen -
Nancy Baym