[Air-L] public/private

[Ed Lamoureux]

On Aug 11, 2007, at 12:47 PM, Lois Ann Scheidt wrote:

> The only way to respectfully judge an author’s choice of an “intended
> audience” is to ask them, otherwise we are using mind-reading to
> “protect” those we see and vulnerable in some fashion.  I will say  
> here
> that I have much more problem with the idea of “mind-reading” people’s
> intentions than I have with saying publicly accessible  
> communication is
> “overheard” or equivalent to a letter to the editor, and therefore  
> open
> country for research.

further, informed consent is about consenting to allowing ones  
material to be used IN RESEARCH.... not just read. A lot of the  
arguments presented in favor of not asking/informing have to do with  
the material being readily available for READING . . . which strikes  
me as a different matter than material that is knowingly allowed to  
be treated as research data.  I know.... if the stuff if fully  
public, one doesn't have to ask for that informed consent. But I  
believe that there are so many grey areas in online communication  
(both in terms of private/public expectations AND intentions about  
recipients) that seeking informed consent of subjects is pretty  
important.  I have to wonder how many bloggers who willingly and self- 
consciously put their stuff out for everyone to read would respond  
when informed that their material was used as research data in a  
specific study . . . one that, perhaps, isn't about what they are  
interested in (or thought they were doing) at all?

Edward Lee Lamoureux, Ph. D.
Associate Professor, Multimedia Program
and Department of Communication
Co-Director, New Media Center
1501 W. Bradley
Bradley University
Peoria IL  61625
309-677-2378
<http://slane.bradley.edu/com/faculty/lamoureux/website2/index.html>
<http://gcc.bradley.edu/mm/>
AIM/IM & skype: dredleelam
Second Life: Professor Beliveau