I have just seen a really interesting film by David MacKenzie "Perfect Sense". The Polish translation of the title is just horrible (terrible title translations is our national sport). It is something like "The last love on the world" :/ Apart from gorgeous Eva Green and Ewan MacGregor the plot is very interesting too, especially in the deaf context.
The story is rather pessimistic one. There are several waves of strange disease striking the humanity. Each attack consists of two phases: first comes the overwhelming emotion (the sadness, rage, hunger, aggressiveness or love) which is followed by the lost of one of the senses. First goes the scent, then taste. The third one the humanity looses is the hearing. Can you imagine? The whole human kind being deaf?
The interesting thing about the film is the adoption process. To each loss people can perfectly adopt sooner or later. The lack of scent and taste can be substituted (in restaurant where the main male character works) with the texture of the food, its humidity or temperature. People still go to the restaurants but are looking for some other experiences then they used to.
The loss of hearing is preceded by the attack of aggressiveness. When infected people wake up after it they realise they are deaf. At first they are being isolated by the services (there are leaflets "If you are deaf stay at home"). They are kept away as unlike the loss of scent and taste deafness is serious loss, that causes the global panic. But even after this plague people can have an ordinary life. With time everything comes back to normal somehow. There are banners in public places with sign language. People are signing in restaurants, they use notes, when attending concerts they are touching the instruments and speakers to feel the sounds.
I am really courious how the Deaf community reacts to this film. On one hand it shows the deafness as a great, horrific loss, a tragedy far more serious than the lack of other senses. On the other hand the idea of deaf humanity is extremely interesting. The deaf communities would lost their uniqueness, the base of their identity and also the ground of their exclusion, but at the same time the whole social life would be organized their way.
I have asked the users of the deaf.pl forum for opinions. I am realy curious what they think about this vision.
Wednesday, 28 March 2012
Tuesday, 27 March 2012
The d(D)eaf and the Technology
During my stay at York University the emerging idea of my forthcoming project took more concrete shape. Now I can quite confidently state that the main core of my project is the usage of the technology by the deaf communities in Poland.
There are several tricky issues regarding this topic, that I will consider in the following posts. The first one is the group of the deaf itself. It is a very diverse community. The deaf, are not the same as the Deaf, hard of hearing or people that lost their hearing as adults. In fact all these groups are different and separate to the great extend. It seems that the crucial feature here is the disability. While deafness is very often considered as illness, as a kind of lack the group of Deaf, perceiving themselves as language minority, they won't see their bodies as damaged or disabled because of deafness.
It is very hard to find a common ground for researching and analysing the deaf considering this great difference in self-perception and identity creation. It will be - as I suppose - hard to investigate the technology usage within such a heterogeneous group of people. For sure the Internet usage will be the crucial ground for investigation here (including the usage of social media, vlogging, forums) but also the technologies such as hearing aids or implants will be taken into consideration.
So far I have started the participant observation on one of the most dynamic online deaf community, which is the deaf.pl.
There are several tricky issues regarding this topic, that I will consider in the following posts. The first one is the group of the deaf itself. It is a very diverse community. The deaf, are not the same as the Deaf, hard of hearing or people that lost their hearing as adults. In fact all these groups are different and separate to the great extend. It seems that the crucial feature here is the disability. While deafness is very often considered as illness, as a kind of lack the group of Deaf, perceiving themselves as language minority, they won't see their bodies as damaged or disabled because of deafness.
It is very hard to find a common ground for researching and analysing the deaf considering this great difference in self-perception and identity creation. It will be - as I suppose - hard to investigate the technology usage within such a heterogeneous group of people. For sure the Internet usage will be the crucial ground for investigation here (including the usage of social media, vlogging, forums) but also the technologies such as hearing aids or implants will be taken into consideration.
So far I have started the participant observation on one of the most dynamic online deaf community, which is the deaf.pl.
Thursday, 8 December 2011
November in Schulich School of Business
That is the problem I have always had with writing diaries - discipline and regularity. But now, almost half a year after my last post, here I am again. Last week I have received mail from new media researcher from Budapest proving that actually someone is reading this blog :) So after long months of lack of enthusiasm (and activity here) I am starting up again.
For the whole November I have left my homeland Poland and (thanks to grant from my university) went to York University in Toronto, Canada. The main aim of my visit was Schulich School of Business and especially Robert Kozinets, the author of nethnography method and this book.
I have already discussed the netnographic method of the Internet research here expressing some doubts. Now I had great opportunity to discuss my questions with the team of researchers actually coding and developing the method.
Netnography seems to be most suitable tool for researching online forums. Here the possibilities of observation, interaction, analysis of discoursive practices (access to archives!) and simply gaining access to community (for interviewing) are the best. Netnography however seems to lose its impact when it comes to investigating social network sites as Facebook. How to apply the method to this new form of online social activity?
In this case participation (so obvious and easily achieved on forums) is much more complicated. The researcher can follow some fan sites and groups - as easy as clicking Like it button. But how can he or she participate in a social group gathered on Facebook? Great amount of users protect their sites from the stranger's eye. First researcher need to become online friends with members of the community he/she is investigated. This situationa quite dramaticaly changes the classical researcher-researched relation.
In traditional ethnographic filed researcher is present in a given (limited) time frames. The relation with the observed community might have been intense and close but ended some time. What should I do with my researched FB friend after my research project is finished? Should I delete him/her? If I "keep" this relationship it will include the field in my everyday life much more than in case of offline filed research. On the other hand deleting such "friend" when the research is done points out vividly the objective, exploitive aspect of the relation (with getting rid of the informant researcher no longer needs).
In general the idea of becoming friends with respondents, gaining access to all their private comments, posts, photos, lists of their friends and their posts, photos is a little bit redifining relationship between researcher and his/her object in offline inquiry. This change is even more dramatic as far as amount (and quality) of information the investigated community has about the researcher. In the offline field researcher plays his/her social/professional role. Researcher shapes the relation with the community basing on this role. What is new in Facebook field is the threat of the loss of authority of the researcher. Not only he/she has open access to community members' profiles but also vice versa. Respondents can easily find researcher's easy comments, favourite songs and films, photos from crazy parties. I do not state it has bad influence on the researcher-community relation, maybe it can even make the communication smoother and easier but I do see some very basic differences between ethnographic and netnographic procedure and researcher-field relation.
It came as a surprise to me, that (as far as I know) most of the netnographic research actually performed by Kozinets and his team is not as participatory as I have expected from the method. It seemed to me that it is rather content and discoursive analysis followed by the interviews than becoming part of the community, "being one of them". To tell the truth it was where I have seen the biggest charm and value of this method.
The chance to talk to the "nethnographic team" at York University was a great opportunity to express my doubts - as it turned out they have similar. Robert Kozinets is now working on application of the method to the SNS as Facebook. I am really looking foreward his new text. At the York University I had opportunity to present my research project (where netnography is one of the core tools). Within next few days I will present it here as well.
For the whole November I have left my homeland Poland and (thanks to grant from my university) went to York University in Toronto, Canada. The main aim of my visit was Schulich School of Business and especially Robert Kozinets, the author of nethnography method and this book.
I have already discussed the netnographic method of the Internet research here expressing some doubts. Now I had great opportunity to discuss my questions with the team of researchers actually coding and developing the method.
Netnography seems to be most suitable tool for researching online forums. Here the possibilities of observation, interaction, analysis of discoursive practices (access to archives!) and simply gaining access to community (for interviewing) are the best. Netnography however seems to lose its impact when it comes to investigating social network sites as Facebook. How to apply the method to this new form of online social activity?
In this case participation (so obvious and easily achieved on forums) is much more complicated. The researcher can follow some fan sites and groups - as easy as clicking Like it button. But how can he or she participate in a social group gathered on Facebook? Great amount of users protect their sites from the stranger's eye. First researcher need to become online friends with members of the community he/she is investigated. This situationa quite dramaticaly changes the classical researcher-researched relation.
In traditional ethnographic filed researcher is present in a given (limited) time frames. The relation with the observed community might have been intense and close but ended some time. What should I do with my researched FB friend after my research project is finished? Should I delete him/her? If I "keep" this relationship it will include the field in my everyday life much more than in case of offline filed research. On the other hand deleting such "friend" when the research is done points out vividly the objective, exploitive aspect of the relation (with getting rid of the informant researcher no longer needs).
In general the idea of becoming friends with respondents, gaining access to all their private comments, posts, photos, lists of their friends and their posts, photos is a little bit redifining relationship between researcher and his/her object in offline inquiry. This change is even more dramatic as far as amount (and quality) of information the investigated community has about the researcher. In the offline field researcher plays his/her social/professional role. Researcher shapes the relation with the community basing on this role. What is new in Facebook field is the threat of the loss of authority of the researcher. Not only he/she has open access to community members' profiles but also vice versa. Respondents can easily find researcher's easy comments, favourite songs and films, photos from crazy parties. I do not state it has bad influence on the researcher-community relation, maybe it can even make the communication smoother and easier but I do see some very basic differences between ethnographic and netnographic procedure and researcher-field relation.
It came as a surprise to me, that (as far as I know) most of the netnographic research actually performed by Kozinets and his team is not as participatory as I have expected from the method. It seemed to me that it is rather content and discoursive analysis followed by the interviews than becoming part of the community, "being one of them". To tell the truth it was where I have seen the biggest charm and value of this method.
The chance to talk to the "nethnographic team" at York University was a great opportunity to express my doubts - as it turned out they have similar. Robert Kozinets is now working on application of the method to the SNS as Facebook. I am really looking foreward his new text. At the York University I had opportunity to present my research project (where netnography is one of the core tools). Within next few days I will present it here as well.
Wednesday, 22 June 2011
Life in a Day - filmed by you
Last time I posted the lacture of Michael Wesch from Kansas State University regarding the new powerful change in peoples relations and the possibilities in oneself representation that is possible due to YouTube. That brought to my mind film Life in a Day I have watched month ago during the opening of the Cracow Film Festival. It is a project (or experiment as it is called by “authors”) undertaken on YouTube. Users were asked to submit the videos showing how did they spend 24th of July 2010. I was wandering how will I bear 1,5hour of YouTube-alike films although I can “watch” YouTube for hours without such dilemmas. I suppose I doubted in the change of format. How will YouTube films act on a big screen? How will I react to this clash of media civilizations? My viewer’s experience of YouTube films is far from my cinema experience (private vs. public sphere, dark space in case of cinema etc).
Surprisingly watching Life in a Day was not painful or unpleasant at all. In fact I really believe I could watch this global flow of images all night long.
The discourse of the organizers of the project is very “you-centered”. They underline it intensively that the real author of the film is the “you” - which in fact means the whole community of Internet (YouTube) users. The film is your (our?) perspective on reality. Life in a Day has the strong taste of the Dziga Vertov’s Kino-Pravda (Cinéma vérité). Now everybody can be Vertov’s Man with a Movie Camera recording the flow of everyday life in which trivial elements and everyday life routine is not destructive but on contrary intriguing phenomenon.
The montage of users’ films from all over the world gives the impression of participation in the truly global text in which the western oppressive perspective is less visible than on the other audiovisual platforms such as news. It looks like the strategy of “global Hollywood”* does not work in this case. We can see images from non-dominant countries (as I call regions usually labeled as Third World) shot by inhabitants of these regions, although some of them must have been shot by western “cameramen” as they reveal the surprise of the local customs and reality. However in fact the questioning the strategy of global Hollywood is quite naïve here because the creator of the project is still the western big production studio under the name-brand of Ridley Scott. It constantly upkeeps the division into creative, vibrant prestigious western center, and the rest of the world where the brilliant ideas are realized. All 4,500 hours of footage sent from all over the world had been seen, selected and edited in the western cultural paradigm.
Although many doubts occur (including the question of authorship – on the screeing in Cracow the author of Polish fragment of the film was present, although he was the author of 20-seconds image that neither me nor any of my friends have noticed , is it a real authorship?) Life in a Day seems to be a new quality as far as use the power of networked individuals in creating the new cultural text.
* T. Miller, N. Govil, J. McMurria, R. Maxwell, Global Hollywood, British Film Institute, London 2001 the idea of the mechanism of global Hollywood was inspired by F. Fröbel, J. Heinrich, O. Kreye, The New International Division of Labour, Cambridge University
Press, London, New York 1980.
Saturday, 18 June 2011
Digital Ethnography @ Kansas State University
Below please find great presentation of professor Michael Wesch giving the taste of the anthropological approach to new media platforms.
Enjoy:
0:00 Introduction, YouTube's Big Numbers
2:00 Numa Numa and the Celebration of Webcams
5:53 The Machine is Us/ing Us and the New Mediascape
12:16 Introducing our Research Team
12:56 Who is on YouTube?
13:25 What's on Youtube? Charlie Bit My Finger, Soulja Boy, etc.
17:04 5% of vids are personal vlogs addressed to the YouTube community, Why?
17:30 YouTube in context. The loss of community and "networked individualism" (Wellman)
18:41 Cultural Inversion: individualism and community
19:15 Understanding new forms of community through Participant Observation
21:18 YouTube as a medium for community
23:00 Our first vlogs
25:00 The webcam: Everybody is watching where nobody is ("context collapse")
26:05 Re-cognition and new forms of self-awareness (McLuhan)
27:58 The Anonymity of Watching YouTube: Haters and Lovers
29:53 Aesthetic Arrest
30:25 Connection without Constraint
32:35 Free Hugs: A hero for our mediated culture
34:02 YouTube Drama: Striving for popularity
34:55 An early star: emokid21ohio
36:55 YouTube's Anthenticity Crisis: the story of LonelyGirl15
39:50 Reflections on Authenticity
41:54 Gaming the system / Exposing the System
43:37 Seriously Playful Participatory Media Culture (featuring Us by blimvisible: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yxHKgQyGx0
47:32 Networked Production: The Collab. MadV's "The Message" and the message of YouTube
49:29 Poem: The Little Glass Dot, The Eyes of the World
51:15 Conclusion by bnessel1973
52:50 Dedication and Credits (Our Numa Numa dance)
It is really interesting presentation about anthropological approach to new media platforms with special devotion to YouTube not only as a new media tool, but mainly as a new mean of users expression and a new experience of being in touch (with who – that is completely other issue).
YouTube is not only one application – it is an element of the whole bunch of sites connected in an interactive net, in which all elements can and do influence each other. It is a new relation within mediasphere, that in television would be called intertextuality I suppose. Here the convergence (in the sense Henry Jenkins uses it) is more applicable term catching the sense of the media practices users are performing. Peoples’ activity links platform such as dig, del.icio.us, blogs, YouTube, Facebook…
I suppose YouTube is a great victory of everyday lifa and simple pleasures. As Michael Wesch shows in his presentation most of the videos on YouTube are home videos – simple and funny. On the other hand vlogs present the great deal of self- and technology awareness.
I really like author’s perspective - that shows great deal of anthropological (and ethnographical) sensitivity – presenting media not as its contant or even useful tool of human communication but rather as the milieu of human RELATIONS. I do really wonder if the same tale told a friend face-to-face is different when recorded on vlog or described on blog. If it changes once released to (potentially) hundreds of viewers/readers. If it changes when there is noone physically close to me – there is only computer. I believe there is a change in relation not only the mean of communication. That is the question of human experience which is far more than only the story telling.
Enjoy:
0:00 Introduction, YouTube's Big Numbers
2:00 Numa Numa and the Celebration of Webcams
5:53 The Machine is Us/ing Us and the New Mediascape
12:16 Introducing our Research Team
12:56 Who is on YouTube?
13:25 What's on Youtube? Charlie Bit My Finger, Soulja Boy, etc.
17:04 5% of vids are personal vlogs addressed to the YouTube community, Why?
17:30 YouTube in context. The loss of community and "networked individualism" (Wellman)
18:41 Cultural Inversion: individualism and community
19:15 Understanding new forms of community through Participant Observation
21:18 YouTube as a medium for community
23:00 Our first vlogs
25:00 The webcam: Everybody is watching where nobody is ("context collapse")
26:05 Re-cognition and new forms of self-awareness (McLuhan)
27:58 The Anonymity of Watching YouTube: Haters and Lovers
29:53 Aesthetic Arrest
30:25 Connection without Constraint
32:35 Free Hugs: A hero for our mediated culture
34:02 YouTube Drama: Striving for popularity
34:55 An early star: emokid21ohio
36:55 YouTube's Anthenticity Crisis: the story of LonelyGirl15
39:50 Reflections on Authenticity
41:54 Gaming the system / Exposing the System
43:37 Seriously Playful Participatory Media Culture (featuring Us by blimvisible: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yxHKgQyGx0
47:32 Networked Production: The Collab. MadV's "The Message" and the message of YouTube
49:29 Poem: The Little Glass Dot, The Eyes of the World
51:15 Conclusion by bnessel1973
52:50 Dedication and Credits (Our Numa Numa dance)
It is really interesting presentation about anthropological approach to new media platforms with special devotion to YouTube not only as a new media tool, but mainly as a new mean of users expression and a new experience of being in touch (with who – that is completely other issue).
YouTube is not only one application – it is an element of the whole bunch of sites connected in an interactive net, in which all elements can and do influence each other. It is a new relation within mediasphere, that in television would be called intertextuality I suppose. Here the convergence (in the sense Henry Jenkins uses it) is more applicable term catching the sense of the media practices users are performing. Peoples’ activity links platform such as dig, del.icio.us, blogs, YouTube, Facebook…
I suppose YouTube is a great victory of everyday lifa and simple pleasures. As Michael Wesch shows in his presentation most of the videos on YouTube are home videos – simple and funny. On the other hand vlogs present the great deal of self- and technology awareness.
I really like author’s perspective - that shows great deal of anthropological (and ethnographical) sensitivity – presenting media not as its contant or even useful tool of human communication but rather as the milieu of human RELATIONS. I do really wonder if the same tale told a friend face-to-face is different when recorded on vlog or described on blog. If it changes once released to (potentially) hundreds of viewers/readers. If it changes when there is noone physically close to me – there is only computer. I believe there is a change in relation not only the mean of communication. That is the question of human experience which is far more than only the story telling.
Netnography: obstacles
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.
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.
Wednesday, 4 May 2011
Virtual Ethnography in FQS
Forum: Qualitative Social Research is an open-acces and free-download online journal connected with Freie Universität Berlin (Open University in Berlin, Germany). FQS is a peer-reviewed multilingual online journal for qualitative research established in 1999. FQSthematic issues are published tri-annually. Each number is divided into FQS Reviews, FQS Debates, FQS Conferences and FQS Interviews.
In 2007 Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research devoted one of its volumes to virtual ethnography
In the volume devoted to virtual ethnography you can find (and download) articles:
Virtual Ethnography by Daniel Domínguez Figaredo, Anne Beaulieu, Adolfo Estalella, Edgar Gómez, Bernt Schnettler, Rosie Read
An introduction to the whole thematic volume
On New Means or New Forms of Investigation. A Methodological Proposal for Online Social Investigation through a Virtual Forum by Rubén Arriazu Muñoz (in Spanish)
Abstract: Processes and instruments of communication have constituted an important object for Internet researchers, and have been investigated using qualitative methodologies in social research. The most common strategy has been to adapt orthodox instruments and procedures to the virtual context. In this paper I address the following questions in order to develop a framework for virtual research. Using a virtual forum as starting point, I ask: Is virtual research a new taxonomy or an extension of conventional social research techniques? Is virtual research located at the same level as face-to-face research? Is it a new communicational research form? This paper presents a methodological approach using virtual forums as tools where asynchronous communication flows. I analyze the use of virtual forums in interaction with the social context, and articulate the method that emerges from this fieldwork situation.
Riereta.net: Epistemic and Political Notes From a Techno-Activist Ethnography by Blanca Callén, Marcel Balasch, Paz Guarderas, Pamela Gutierrez, Alejandra León, Marisela Montenegro, Karla Montenegro, Joan Pujol (in Spanish as well)
Abstract: In this article we report on an ethnographic research experience on Riereta, a techno-activist workshop located in Barcelona, where free software and other technologies are developed and put at the disposal of other political projects and activist collectives. Through our research experience, we answer some methodological issues but also raise related epistemic and political questions: What kind of methodical tools must we implement in order to experience the semiotic and material dimension of the subject? How to introduce the technology in our research activity? What kind of methodology can we develop if we want to be consistent with participants' wishes and ways of life? or How to take account of multiple and different voices that compose every ethnographic comprehension and creative practice? All of these questions could be summarized as an quest for turning social research and ethnographic practice into techno-political action. The article is organized in three parts: 1) the relationship between research subjects and objects variously constituted, shifting from a co-research perspective to an epistemologically articulated one; 2) the methodology applied, close to a performative and virtual ethnographic perspective where some technological tools, such as Tiki-Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TikiWiki), are used; and 3) the products of the research process: collective and situated understandings of technoactivism.
Field Ethics: Towards Situated Ethics for Ethnographic Research on the Internet by Adolfo Estalella, Elisenda Ardèvol (in Spanish)
Abstract: This article reflects openly on the decisions that researchers have to deal with when undertaking qualitative research, especially ethnography, on the Internet. Our argument takes as starting point the ethical guidelines already developed for human subject research, and the way Internet researchers have tried to adapt these guidelines to their field. We argue that many of these ethical recommendations for researching the Internet have been designed according to specific applications (a chat, a mailing list, a blog, etc.), conferring specific properties to technology and making inferences about the kind of interaction that is taking place through such devices (public or private, for instance). We question these approaches and consider that the attribution of properties to technology restricts the scope of the ethical decisions that the researcher can make. We advocate a dialogical and situated ethical practice that takes into account every particular context when making any ethical decision during research. In line with this proposal, we report some ethical dilemmas that we have had to face in our own fieldwork on blogging practices among Spanish bloggers. We also draw on our experience of creating a "field blog" as part of our research. We describe three axes that have helped us to guide our ethical decisions in the field: the scope of individual data collected for participants in the course of research, the explicit and open presence of the researchers, and the search for symmetry and mutuality with our respondents in the field.
Mobile Subjects, Mobile Methods: Doing Virtual Ethnography in a Feminist Online Network by Michaela Fay
Abstract: In this article I give an account of my cyberethnographic study of the International Women's University "Technology and Culture" (ifu) 2000 and the network its participants formed in the ifu's virtual extension, vifu. The article offers a description of the methodological considerations and challenges I was confronted with whilst carrying out this research. In addition, I explore these methodological considerations on a conceptual level. Primarily concerned with questions of home and belonging and the question of how these notions figure in contemporary mobile lives, I explore here how conducting online research became the only possible method to adequately reflect the "mobile" nature not only of the event ifu and its virtual extension vifu, but also the ways in which participants negotiate belonging and mobility in their respective worlds and to the (v)ifu network.
Logging into the Field—Methodological Reflections on Ethnographic Research in a Pluri-Local and Computer-Mediated Field by Heike Mónika Greschke (in German)
Abstract: This article aims to introduce an ethnic group inhabiting a common virtual space in the World Wide Web (WWW), while being physically located in different socio-geographical contexts. Potentially global in its geographical extent, this social formation is constituted by means of interrelating virtual-global dimensions with physically grounded parts of the actors' lifeworlds. In addition, the communities' social life relies on specific communicative practices joining mediated forms of communication with co-presence based encounters. Ethnographic research in a pluri-local and computer-mediated field poses a set of problems which demand thorough reflection as well as a search for creative solutions. How can the boundaries of the field be determined? What does "being there" signify in such a case? Is it possible to enter the field while sitting at my own desk, just by visiting the respective site in the WWW, simply observing the communication going on without even being noticed by the subjects in the field? Or does "being in the field" imply that I ought to turn into a member of the studied community? Am I supposed to effectively live with the others for a while? And then, what can "living together" actually mean in that case? Will I learn enough about the field simply by participating in its virtual activities? Or do I have to account for the physically grounded dimensions of the actors' lifeworlds, as well? Ethnographic research in a pluri-local and computer-mediated field in practice raises a lot of questions regarding the ways of entering the field and being in the field. Some of them will be discussed in this paper by means of reflecting research experiences gained in the context of a recently concluded case study.
Ethnography of Online Role-Playing Games: The Role of Virtual and Real Contest in the Construction of the Field by Simona Isabella
Abstract: This paper invites the reader into the world of MUDs (Multi User Domains). Its underlying goal is to analyse certain social challenges associated with computer mediated communication (CMC), specifically with respect to the concept of the game; the process involved in the construction of the online Self or personality, potentially perceived as the final culmination of the frequent "comings and goings" between the game and reality; the concept of community that develops between two different frames—the virtual world and the real one; and, finally, the concept of both online and offline "experience". The empirical research, focusing on a comparison between an Italian and a Canadian MUDs interactive game, used online ethnography as the basic premise of study and biographical interviews with the players themselves, as further validation of the phenomenon. A fundamental question faces a researcher when conducting the study of a MUD—is the online game the only realm to consider? What is the impact of a multitude of other media (Instant messaging, boards, e-mails, SMS etc.) used by mudders to communicate in order to organize the game and become familiar with each other? Is it necessary for a researcher to totally abandon the players' social premise even if s/he is focusing her/his research on online relationships? These are some of the questions this paper endeavours to answer, while also being cognizant of the methodological problems researchers encounter when studying the Internet, both as a medium (of communication) and as a research framework.
How Did I Get to Princess Margaret? (And How Did I Get Her to the World Wide Web?)
by Kip Jones
Abstract: The paper explores the growing use of tools from the arts and humanities for investigation and dissemination of social science research. Emerging spaces for knowledge transfer, such as the World Wide Web, are explored as outlets for "performative social science". Questions of ethnics and questions of evaluation which emerge from performative social science and the use of new technologies are discussed. Contemporary thinking in aesthetics is explored to answer questions of evaluation. The use of the Internet for productions is proposed as supporting the collective elaboration of meaning supported by Relational Aesthetics. One solution to the ethical problem of performing the narrations of others is the use of the writer's own story as autoethnography. The author queries autoethnography's tendency to tell "sad" stories and proposes an amusing story, exemplified by "The One about Princess Margaret" (see http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/rt/suppFiles/281/618). The conclusion is reached that the free and open environment of the Internet sidelines the usual tediousness of academic publishing and begins to explore new answers to questions posed about the evaluation and ethics of performative social science.
Developing Cyberethnographic Research Methods for Understanding Digitally Mediated Identities by Natalia Rybas, Radhika Gajjala
Abstract: In this essay, we discuss the production of subjectivities at the intersection of local/global and online/offline environments through an engagement with the contexts ethnographically, to illustrate a methodology based on epistemologies of doing. We suggest that researchers studying the production of identity in technospaces must engage in the production of culture and subjectivity in the specific context while interacting with others doing the same in order to gain a nuanced understanding of how identities are formed and performed in such socio-economic environments. Identities thus produced are central to the workings of community situated in specific social, economic and cultural practices and structures of power. Through examining practices that shape these identity formations within various technological environments, we can work towards developing theoretical frameworks that actively shift hierarchies of oppression.
The Internet as a Library-Of-People: For a Cyberethnography of Online Groups by Maurizio Teli, Francesco Pisanu, David Hakken
Abstract: The concept "cyberethnography" remains undefined in the social sciences while, at the same time, still overlapping too much with the more well-known concept of "virtual ethnography." The aim of our paper is to remedy this situation by underlining new directions in the ethnographic study of computer mediated settings. To do so, we define cyberspace as computer-mediated contexts intrinsically related to supposed-to-be "real" places. From this point of view the ethnography of online groups is not just the ethnography of the groups online (or the online ethnography of groups), but it is both the ethnography of online and related off-line situations, the ethnography of humans and non-human actors in these related fields. It is hybrid, like a cyborg. In a word, it is a cyberethnography. In the first part of the paper, we discuss linkages between classical ethnography and its cyber developments. In the second part, we ground epistemologically the argument in favor of a robust social concept of "cyborg" drawing mainly from the fields called Science, Technology and Society (STS), and Organization Studies (OS). In the third part, we focus our argument on web-based group issues, using field data from our own research to define this kind of group and propose a metaphor, "the Internet as a library-of-people." This metaphor, which is strictly grounded in the cyborg concept, highlights the cyborgic characteristic of society that arises in research practice.
In 2007 Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research devoted one of its volumes to virtual ethnography
In the volume devoted to virtual ethnography you can find (and download) articles:
Virtual Ethnography by Daniel Domínguez Figaredo, Anne Beaulieu, Adolfo Estalella, Edgar Gómez, Bernt Schnettler, Rosie Read
An introduction to the whole thematic volume
On New Means or New Forms of Investigation. A Methodological Proposal for Online Social Investigation through a Virtual Forum by Rubén Arriazu Muñoz (in Spanish)
Abstract: Processes and instruments of communication have constituted an important object for Internet researchers, and have been investigated using qualitative methodologies in social research. The most common strategy has been to adapt orthodox instruments and procedures to the virtual context. In this paper I address the following questions in order to develop a framework for virtual research. Using a virtual forum as starting point, I ask: Is virtual research a new taxonomy or an extension of conventional social research techniques? Is virtual research located at the same level as face-to-face research? Is it a new communicational research form? This paper presents a methodological approach using virtual forums as tools where asynchronous communication flows. I analyze the use of virtual forums in interaction with the social context, and articulate the method that emerges from this fieldwork situation.
Riereta.net: Epistemic and Political Notes From a Techno-Activist Ethnography by Blanca Callén, Marcel Balasch, Paz Guarderas, Pamela Gutierrez, Alejandra León, Marisela Montenegro, Karla Montenegro, Joan Pujol (in Spanish as well)
Abstract: In this article we report on an ethnographic research experience on Riereta, a techno-activist workshop located in Barcelona, where free software and other technologies are developed and put at the disposal of other political projects and activist collectives. Through our research experience, we answer some methodological issues but also raise related epistemic and political questions: What kind of methodical tools must we implement in order to experience the semiotic and material dimension of the subject? How to introduce the technology in our research activity? What kind of methodology can we develop if we want to be consistent with participants' wishes and ways of life? or How to take account of multiple and different voices that compose every ethnographic comprehension and creative practice? All of these questions could be summarized as an quest for turning social research and ethnographic practice into techno-political action. The article is organized in three parts: 1) the relationship between research subjects and objects variously constituted, shifting from a co-research perspective to an epistemologically articulated one; 2) the methodology applied, close to a performative and virtual ethnographic perspective where some technological tools, such as Tiki-Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TikiWiki), are used; and 3) the products of the research process: collective and situated understandings of technoactivism.
Field Ethics: Towards Situated Ethics for Ethnographic Research on the Internet by Adolfo Estalella, Elisenda Ardèvol (in Spanish)
Abstract: This article reflects openly on the decisions that researchers have to deal with when undertaking qualitative research, especially ethnography, on the Internet. Our argument takes as starting point the ethical guidelines already developed for human subject research, and the way Internet researchers have tried to adapt these guidelines to their field. We argue that many of these ethical recommendations for researching the Internet have been designed according to specific applications (a chat, a mailing list, a blog, etc.), conferring specific properties to technology and making inferences about the kind of interaction that is taking place through such devices (public or private, for instance). We question these approaches and consider that the attribution of properties to technology restricts the scope of the ethical decisions that the researcher can make. We advocate a dialogical and situated ethical practice that takes into account every particular context when making any ethical decision during research. In line with this proposal, we report some ethical dilemmas that we have had to face in our own fieldwork on blogging practices among Spanish bloggers. We also draw on our experience of creating a "field blog" as part of our research. We describe three axes that have helped us to guide our ethical decisions in the field: the scope of individual data collected for participants in the course of research, the explicit and open presence of the researchers, and the search for symmetry and mutuality with our respondents in the field.
Mobile Subjects, Mobile Methods: Doing Virtual Ethnography in a Feminist Online Network by Michaela Fay
Abstract: In this article I give an account of my cyberethnographic study of the International Women's University "Technology and Culture" (ifu) 2000 and the network its participants formed in the ifu's virtual extension, vifu. The article offers a description of the methodological considerations and challenges I was confronted with whilst carrying out this research. In addition, I explore these methodological considerations on a conceptual level. Primarily concerned with questions of home and belonging and the question of how these notions figure in contemporary mobile lives, I explore here how conducting online research became the only possible method to adequately reflect the "mobile" nature not only of the event ifu and its virtual extension vifu, but also the ways in which participants negotiate belonging and mobility in their respective worlds and to the (v)ifu network.
Logging into the Field—Methodological Reflections on Ethnographic Research in a Pluri-Local and Computer-Mediated Field by Heike Mónika Greschke (in German)
Abstract: This article aims to introduce an ethnic group inhabiting a common virtual space in the World Wide Web (WWW), while being physically located in different socio-geographical contexts. Potentially global in its geographical extent, this social formation is constituted by means of interrelating virtual-global dimensions with physically grounded parts of the actors' lifeworlds. In addition, the communities' social life relies on specific communicative practices joining mediated forms of communication with co-presence based encounters. Ethnographic research in a pluri-local and computer-mediated field poses a set of problems which demand thorough reflection as well as a search for creative solutions. How can the boundaries of the field be determined? What does "being there" signify in such a case? Is it possible to enter the field while sitting at my own desk, just by visiting the respective site in the WWW, simply observing the communication going on without even being noticed by the subjects in the field? Or does "being in the field" imply that I ought to turn into a member of the studied community? Am I supposed to effectively live with the others for a while? And then, what can "living together" actually mean in that case? Will I learn enough about the field simply by participating in its virtual activities? Or do I have to account for the physically grounded dimensions of the actors' lifeworlds, as well? Ethnographic research in a pluri-local and computer-mediated field in practice raises a lot of questions regarding the ways of entering the field and being in the field. Some of them will be discussed in this paper by means of reflecting research experiences gained in the context of a recently concluded case study.
Ethnography of Online Role-Playing Games: The Role of Virtual and Real Contest in the Construction of the Field by Simona Isabella
Abstract: This paper invites the reader into the world of MUDs (Multi User Domains). Its underlying goal is to analyse certain social challenges associated with computer mediated communication (CMC), specifically with respect to the concept of the game; the process involved in the construction of the online Self or personality, potentially perceived as the final culmination of the frequent "comings and goings" between the game and reality; the concept of community that develops between two different frames—the virtual world and the real one; and, finally, the concept of both online and offline "experience". The empirical research, focusing on a comparison between an Italian and a Canadian MUDs interactive game, used online ethnography as the basic premise of study and biographical interviews with the players themselves, as further validation of the phenomenon. A fundamental question faces a researcher when conducting the study of a MUD—is the online game the only realm to consider? What is the impact of a multitude of other media (Instant messaging, boards, e-mails, SMS etc.) used by mudders to communicate in order to organize the game and become familiar with each other? Is it necessary for a researcher to totally abandon the players' social premise even if s/he is focusing her/his research on online relationships? These are some of the questions this paper endeavours to answer, while also being cognizant of the methodological problems researchers encounter when studying the Internet, both as a medium (of communication) and as a research framework.
How Did I Get to Princess Margaret? (And How Did I Get Her to the World Wide Web?)
by Kip Jones
Abstract: The paper explores the growing use of tools from the arts and humanities for investigation and dissemination of social science research. Emerging spaces for knowledge transfer, such as the World Wide Web, are explored as outlets for "performative social science". Questions of ethnics and questions of evaluation which emerge from performative social science and the use of new technologies are discussed. Contemporary thinking in aesthetics is explored to answer questions of evaluation. The use of the Internet for productions is proposed as supporting the collective elaboration of meaning supported by Relational Aesthetics. One solution to the ethical problem of performing the narrations of others is the use of the writer's own story as autoethnography. The author queries autoethnography's tendency to tell "sad" stories and proposes an amusing story, exemplified by "The One about Princess Margaret" (see http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/rt/suppFiles/281/618). The conclusion is reached that the free and open environment of the Internet sidelines the usual tediousness of academic publishing and begins to explore new answers to questions posed about the evaluation and ethics of performative social science.
Developing Cyberethnographic Research Methods for Understanding Digitally Mediated Identities by Natalia Rybas, Radhika Gajjala
Abstract: In this essay, we discuss the production of subjectivities at the intersection of local/global and online/offline environments through an engagement with the contexts ethnographically, to illustrate a methodology based on epistemologies of doing. We suggest that researchers studying the production of identity in technospaces must engage in the production of culture and subjectivity in the specific context while interacting with others doing the same in order to gain a nuanced understanding of how identities are formed and performed in such socio-economic environments. Identities thus produced are central to the workings of community situated in specific social, economic and cultural practices and structures of power. Through examining practices that shape these identity formations within various technological environments, we can work towards developing theoretical frameworks that actively shift hierarchies of oppression.
The Internet as a Library-Of-People: For a Cyberethnography of Online Groups by Maurizio Teli, Francesco Pisanu, David Hakken
Abstract: The concept "cyberethnography" remains undefined in the social sciences while, at the same time, still overlapping too much with the more well-known concept of "virtual ethnography." The aim of our paper is to remedy this situation by underlining new directions in the ethnographic study of computer mediated settings. To do so, we define cyberspace as computer-mediated contexts intrinsically related to supposed-to-be "real" places. From this point of view the ethnography of online groups is not just the ethnography of the groups online (or the online ethnography of groups), but it is both the ethnography of online and related off-line situations, the ethnography of humans and non-human actors in these related fields. It is hybrid, like a cyborg. In a word, it is a cyberethnography. In the first part of the paper, we discuss linkages between classical ethnography and its cyber developments. In the second part, we ground epistemologically the argument in favor of a robust social concept of "cyborg" drawing mainly from the fields called Science, Technology and Society (STS), and Organization Studies (OS). In the third part, we focus our argument on web-based group issues, using field data from our own research to define this kind of group and propose a metaphor, "the Internet as a library-of-people." This metaphor, which is strictly grounded in the cyborg concept, highlights the cyborgic characteristic of society that arises in research practice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)