The article discusses the distinction between ethical and unethical methods in research, emphasizing that ethical methods include publicly available information and consented interviews. It highlights that while methods and sources overlap, understanding their differences is crucial. The further research methods stray from public access, the more moral complexity arises. Using analogies of observing public behavior versus invading privacy, the article argues that while some methods may seem unethical, there are circumstances—like legitimate reporting—where breaching privacy can be justified if it's in the interest of public knowledge.
While there is an overlap between methods and sources, there are important distinctions that require considering them separately. Methods are how you get information. Sources are where it comes from.
Research methods become potentially more morally controversial the further one strays from publicly available methods. To use an analogy, looking at what a person is doing in public is (generally) not morally problematic.
It might be tempting to regard all such methods as immoral, but there are morally acceptable methods that breach this wall. Reporters engaged in legitimate reporting can justly break the walls of privacy.
Collection
[
|
...
]