[Air-l] ethnography and ethics

Ed Lamoureux ell at bradley.edu
Mon May 10 05:40:49 PDT 2004



> ed wrote
>> I've always let the test be that  I, as researcher, am out in the 
>> open in the plain view of the subject. If they are speaking loudly 
>> enough that I can hear without any special equipment, or effort, I 
>> treat the conversation as public talk freely available for analysis 
>> (and recording). In the case of the cell phone, I am not "tapping" 
>> the phone call illegally cause I can't hear the other side of the 
>> conversation.
>
On May 10, 2004, at 6:35 AM, Radhika Gajjala wrote:
>
> but you'd be amazed at how shocked they would be if they then saw 
> their words quoted in a public(ation) text.
>
But you'd be amazed at how shocked I am to have to listen to their talk 
in the first place. If the talk IS private, I should not be able to 
hear it without special equipment. If I can, it's not private talk, no 
matter what "they expect." The subjects set the expectations 
themselves. If they talk in a way that others in public can't hear . .  
. it's private. If they don't, it's public.

> What is invaded is the Individual's *sense* of privacy - whatever the 
> medium used.

Again. The sense of privacy  has already been invaded. Not by the 
researcher . .  . but by the subjects, themselves who have taken a 
private matter into the public domain. I agree that the medium doesn't 
matter . . . the fact that they are holding a small plastic device to 
the side of their head doesn't mean that I've got to go suddenly deaf 
and and become unable to write.  But their carrying on their private 
business loudly in my knowing presence means that they have included me 
in the talk, albeit as audience, but as approved participant 
nevertheless.

>  It is in the recording and reproducing of things said

how about if I just take field notes? Or have an incredible memory?

>  in contexts that they cannot themselves control

Boy is this a crock. . . what they've not controlled is private setting 
. . . and that's wholly of their own doing, not of mine.
>
> So who has the power to reproduce everyday conversations and place in 
> con(texts) where they get generalized and used for policy and other 
> forms of (mis) representation?

I know there is power at work . . . and scientific work often brings 
such issues into question/relief. In effect, any time a researcher 
notes a behavior, reproduces and account of it, and "explains" or 
"interprets" it .  .. these power aspects are at issue. And one can 
always accuse the researcher of abusing power merely because they have 
decided to do any interpretation.

But qualitative researchers don't  have to check their interpretive 
"authority" at the door just because they are trying to explain 
meanings.

Subjects in this case have a very simple protection of privacy. Talk in 
private. I absolutely promise to NEVER use technology to record 
something that I could not otherwise hear (without the technology). 
Further, I absolutely promise to NEVER hide recording technology in 
such a way that subjects can't see perfectly well for themselves that 
I'm present with recording equipment. I use a recording walkwan, hung 
around my neck so that it is in front of my body in full view at all 
times. And I promise to follow the state law on recording, wherever I 
am. If it's against the law to record without prior permission, I 
don't.

But if Joe Friday decides to talk in my presence, in public, in such a 
way that makes his talk readily available to me as an audience, he is 
already fully aware that I am "recording" his talk . . . for without 
technology, my brain is a recorder and Joe Friday knows that I am using 
it. . . if I aid it with machinery, the point hasn't changed. Joe 
Friday, subject, has made me part of the scene via his knowing behavior 
in my public presence.
>
Edward Lee Lamoureux, Ph. D.
Director, Multimedia Program and New Media Center
Associate Professor, Speech Communication
1501 W. Bradley
Bradley University
Peoria IL  61625
309-677-2378
http://hilltop.bradley.edu/~ell
http://gcc.bradley.edu/mm/





More information about the Air-L mailing list