Legal issues in virtual ethnographies

Legal issues in the making of a virtual ethnography: The Louise Woodward case
Louise Woodward was a British au pair responsible for caring for the two Eappen children over their parents' long periods of absence. Matthew Eappen suffered a brain haemorrhage, 'shaken baby syndrome' and died from damage caused inside his skull. He was 8 months old. Louise was charged with murder. The presiding judge released his decision on the case through the internet. This choice leads to many interesting issues.

Firstly, was there a legal requirement for the presiding judge to release his judgment in a more traditional method? (e.g. in a paper format for newspapers)?

Probably not.

American states publish reports of appellate level cases in legal reports which go all the way up to the Supreme Court. In the jurisdictions of England and Wales, higher English court decisions are reported in a complete series from the Year Books of Edward II to Henry VIII to the present. Similarly, Canadian provinces have official legal reports for superior and appellate court decisions as well as for federal courts and the Supreme Court of Canada. Although criminal cases like the Woodward case would normally need to be reported in a formal legal reporter to become a part of the "public record", it does not appear as though there is a firm legal requirement for the presiding judge to report it to the press, print or online.

Further, regardless of legal requirements to share results, since the Woodward case was criminal in nature, it would be difficult to find an appropriate traditional medium which could support its gravity and widespread concern such a case would create. For example, municipal and regional newspapers do not have jurisdictions that mimic the national nature of, or international interest in, a criminal offence. As a result, although it appears as though there is no legal compulsion to publish in the popular press in any manner, even if there was, it would be difficult to choose an appropriate medium that has suitable scope.


Secondly, is it morally suspect to release a legal decision on the internet?

In this case, arguably yes.

The case was decided during the infancy of the internet (1997) and relatively few people had access to information provided this way. Since the legal decision in this case was a public issue of wide concern (e.g. care of a child), this information should have been published in the most pervasive and least restricted manner. The internet arguably did not meet this criteria at that time.

However, perhaps you could potentially make the alternative case today and especially "tomorrow". Given the high penetration of broadband access in homes, perhaps internet publication is, or will be, the only way to fully inform the populace about matters of public concern. As the balance transitions from print to online news consumption
, perhaps the internet will be the only medium of choice. But given economic barriers and resistance by a minority of citizens to be plugged in, will full internet access ever occur? Will tomorrow ever come?


Finally (I had to stop somewhere), was it legal or moral to conduct a study based on this subject matter?

It was definitely legal, probably moral, but personally a bit strange.

In this case, it appears as though there was separation between researcher and subject. The periphery of the internet culture that circled around the issue was surveyed, not the sufferers themselves. Even then, as long as subjects were informed of the nature of the study and were treated in a civil manner and with care, legality should not be an issue. However, is it ever truly moral to exploit someone in a tender situation, even in the most peripheral manner even if it contributes to the "common good", the banner for most research? Hmmm...

References:
Hine, C. (2000) Virtual ethnography. London: Sage. (Ch. 4: The making of a virtual ethnography).

Carr, D. (2008, October 29) Mourning Old Media’s Decline. New York Times. Retrieved from
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/29/business/media/29carr.html?scp=4&sq=gannett&st=cse