collecting and searching
I found the discussion of collecting history online interesting. While there are issues, as we saw with the National Geographic website for Pearl Harbor, the benefits of this method of collection are clear. There will be a few “bad” responses, but I found it encouraging that they have found that most people answer honestly. I think that this method is just as valid as that of oral history, as long as the historian keeps the same possible problems in mind for online history as for oral history. When we use personal narratives about an event that occurred a long time ago, the information from the narrative must be taken with a grain of salt, because you cannot be sure how accurate the subjects’ memories are going to be. Broad, sweeping questioning may be the best way to get as much information as possible when memories might not be that great anymore, and because some people see specific questions as a sort of test and attempt to provide the answer they think the researcher is looking for. However, general questioning is not always enough; follow-ups after someone answers an online survey would help to get more details when necessary. I think it would be great if researchers had the time to follow up on many of the stories gathered online, because people usually do have more to say that could be valuable.
My main question about gathering information online is how to handle responses that may be outside the scope of the research. For example, some people responded to the video store project with stories of working for a store after the date range. Should a researcher who runs into this issue discard the information, or incorporate it into the work in some way? Do you think there is a sort of ethical dilemma in discarding this information?
The September 11 Digital Archive’s use of qualitative analysis in examining the submissions on the site was a way of using online history I had not considered. The analysis showed the true ways that the country reacted to the events of that day. The findings that nationalism was not the most common immediate response to September 11, but that the responses were much more personal, were very telling of how people view their lives, and more importantly to historians, their history. People are far more likely to remember things in personal terms, because as important as a person’s country may be to him/her, it is his/her personal life that is most important. Everyone connects to the broader, national picture, but mostly through the personal ties and experiences.
As for the searching, spidering, and scraping, I was with the author up until he began to talk about spidering. I understand what he was getting at, but I don’t think I could fully comprehend it with my nonexistent knowledge of programming.
January 30th, 2006 at 12:27 pm
The Turkel article was a bit confusing–if only in the sense that I wasn’t sure if he was talking about students actively spidering/scraping through websites or automatic process which did this for them…
As for your question about the date range…”should a researcher who runs into this issue discard the information, or incorporate it into the work in some way? Do you think there is a sort of ethical dilemma in discarding this information?”
I find that, more often than not, those pieces of data have thier own place in the anlalysis and that a researcher can’t discard them as irrelevant but can use them as examples in maybe extrapolating their core results beyond their specified time period. That being said, extrapolation is not hard core analysis–but it may provide a jumping point to show change over time….
January 30th, 2006 at 5:33 pm
I was thinking that we could use students’ pre-existing understanding of reading books and using footnotes to make ideas like ’spidering’ with computers seem less foreign … but I certainly could have phrased it more clearly. Best, Bill
January 30th, 2006 at 10:43 pm
Ahh.. alright. I see what you’re saying…and I would have to say that probably would work. Teaching things in the digital world through the tools we already have would make techniques like spidering/scraping less intimidating.
January 31st, 2006 at 12:01 pm
I like your analysis of how people’s voices on the September 11 Digital Archive inform us as historians as to how people perceive history. The fact that nationalism was quickly added to the meaning of the day I think points to the government’s response rather than those who were personally affected. I agree that archives like the September 11 Digital Archive help us to see this distinction and add nuance to our understanding of history.
January 31st, 2006 at 1:15 pm
The 9-11 archive is very interesting because it shows us people’s immediate, visceral reactions to an event — rather than how different people and/or groups want that reaction to be remembered. Rod’s point about the connection between government actions and the growing importance of nationalism in reactions is particularly relevant.
January 31st, 2006 at 1:17 pm
The 1.31.06 “Priya” comment is actually mine. I didn’t remember to change the setting before posting it.
January 31st, 2006 at 3:01 pm
You raise an intersting question in regard to the video store postings. Should the researcher discard such postings or incorporate them into his work? This opens up the question of objectivity. How much tinkering shoud an historian do when it comes to recording historical memory online. However in this case the perameters were set by the researcher and the individual who responded stepped outside of those restrictions.
January 31st, 2006 at 3:32 pm
In response to your question about individual responses outside the range set by the historian. It seems very difficult for historians to work within a specific time frame. While a historian’s analysis may focus on that set time period, inevitably a historian cannot ignore events that happened prior to and after that period. So no, I do not think the historian should discard the postings. I think it is actually better that there are responses from outside the framed time period. While it probably makes more work for the historian, it will also greatly add to the depth of the analysis.
December 2nd, 2006 at 4:53 pm
polumadnada…
polumadnada…
December 24th, 2006 at 11:47 am
very good post…
…
January 15th, 2007 at 6:54 am
hello. it’s a nice day for your ideas and our money…
…