One of the most problematic issues concerning the netnographical method is the problem of participation and the participant observation on one hand and the ethics and the requirement to reveal my identity as a researcher on the other. That is the point where the announced fall of the observer’s paradox seems to be far too premature.
The participant observation, the method that was the main way of getting to know how people live and act in social context when they are not observed, was doomed to failure as long as researcher was visibly present. Netnography seems to reduce this overwhelming presence to minimum and gives access to peoples behaviours and expressions just as they are. And here lies the problem of participating in the researched online group. Once I reveal my academic background and research intentions I ruin the “nature state” of the group. I am a kind of invader who is the Other, who is observing and asking questions. On the other hand I cannot conduct research pretending to be the newbe.
I am afraid I simply do not believe in full participation (which is an integral part of netnographic procedure) once researcher admits his/her identity. At the same time I do feel that the Internet is a great milieu for a truly anthropological action. For action that is far beyond content analysis or even interviews with online group members. That is becoming a part of the group, taking actions they take, knowing the language they use.
These are the questions I am asking myself on the threshold of my research on this and this online community. Bothe of them are Polish communities of the Deaf. I really wonder how to approach these users to be accepted and gain access to the maximum of activities and senses they create there. This research is connected with my participation in conference about excluded actors of social scene. I would like to investigate how the Deaf are using the Internet as a tool of compensating the off-line inequalities.
No comments:
Post a Comment