[Air-L] Inquiry on screen shots

[Xanat Meza]

Hello everyone,
in this case, I would not take much in account what the platforms say or not say about the content users generate in them, because let us be honest, platforms want to do business and their terms of use are aligned with that objective. The first question I would ask is, do these users want their content to be public in the first place? Many of the people who are object to revenge porn were coerced to make it on the first place, and many others keep suffering the consequences. The last thing they want is for their content to be reused without their permission. 
I would suggest to present the research findings in an aggregated way to avoid identification of individuals, but more than anything, to work together with these individuals when such sensitive topics are being researched. In that way, we can build trust and also find better research methods that respect boundaries.
Regards,
Xanat V. Meza

Ph.D. candidate - Kansei, Behavioral and Brain SciencesUniversity of Tsukuba
M.A. Media and Communication
Yeungnam University
B.D. Graphic Communication Design
Universidad Autonoma Metropolitana
 

    El jueves, 28 de febrero de 2019 5:05:53 p. m. GMT+9, Chris Leslie <chrisleslienyc at hotmail.com> escribió:  
 
 Dear Alex Gekker, 

I think you are making an effort to be clever, humorous, or provocative. However, I don’t think the ethical question posed by the original query goes away because it relates to something we do every day (or that the human subject are doing among themselves). I also think the difference you suggest about private messages and public posts is worth thinking about more.

For instance, what if I published an academic article about the attitudes of Internet researchers and quote your email as an example that reflects x number of posts on the AOIR listserv? Depending on my thesis, you could rightly be offended and potentially harmed by my article, even if forwarding the email chain to your grad students or summarizing the discussion for their benefit might have seemed ok. In the journal article, I am using your statement as a research finding - a generalization of a human trend I have observed that is backed up by quantitative data. Yet in sending your email to the group, you didn’t consent to being a human subject and you were not given the opportunity to give permission afterward. Even if I changed your name and rearranged the words, you could still feel like you were identifiable to members of AOIR who witnessed the conversation.

I interact publicly with humans in everyday life - asking people their opinions about politics or their jobs, for example - in ways that are ethical in interpersonal or educational settings. Those activities don’t involve the IRB or raise ethical concerns because they are not the foundation for research findings. Everything changes when I publish an article with my name and academic affiliation and the implied endorsement of the academic journal. So, to me, the dilemma you pose doesn’t seem to reflect the need for IRB clearance in the first place.

Chris
_______________________________________________
The Air-L at listserv.aoir.org mailing list
is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org
Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org

Join the Association of Internet Researchers:
http://www.aoir.org/