The ethics of studying online fandom

This chapter illustrates how utilitarian approaches often harm the already most vulnerable, which indicates the superiority of clear rules like the ones endeavored by Internal Review Boards. It suggests that even personal imperatives can become detrimental when a strict set of rules fails in specific situations. If online texts are testimonies of human research subjects, researchers need IRB permissions with informed consent, and even pseudonyms should be redacted. In a field like fandom studies the sheer wealth of material, the speed and ephemerality of information and the seeming endless number of fannish online spaces alone mean that any research is limited by definition to what the author knows, has access to and, frankly, is interested in. Using personal narratives and experiences to argue theoretical points, it often acknowledges if not celebrates the fact that scientific objectivity can only ever be a falsehood, that any observation, description, and theory always carries the imprint of the researchers themselves.

Fandom · Media studies · Sociology · Asian Culture and Media Studies · Digital Games and Media · Impact of Technology on Adolescents

• Fan studies and/as feminist methodology

  Open Access•Briony Hannell•Transformative Works and Cultures•2020

  Incluir item

• Capitalocene Getaways

  Open Access•Linda May, B Welling Hall et al.•Green Letters•2025

  Incluir item

• The Elusive Fandom

  Open Access•Evgenia Nim•Sociological Journal•2024

  Incluir item

• Fan labour as mnemonic labour

  Open Access•Eva Cheuk-Yin Li•Feminist Review•2026

  Incluir item