Law Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words - 1

Law - Term Paper Example The author will also try to explain why Canada has the highest rate of illegal MP3 downloads in the world. The author will analyze the legislative acts that regulate the copyright protection in Canada and will point out their weak points, those that make illegal music downloading possible and, to some extent, legal. Examples of law cases based on illegal MP3 download will be produced and analyzed. The research paper will be concluded with several suggestions on how this situation might be improved in such a way that Canada is no longer the â€Å"winner† among the top countries with the highest level of piracy in music downloads. The USA Digital Millennium Copyright Act has certainly gained its â€Å"fans† among the people who not so long ago were downloading mp3s without any restriction and who now must check twice before accepting a download or a file-sharing. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act has outlawed many online activities, among which it is easy to find the mp3 downloading. So, unless you are a librarian who desperately believes that music is important for the library (and you can even prove it) or a researcher, there is no other legal way which would allow you to download or share music files in USA. The DMCA and the United States Copyright Law also outlaw making copies of copyrighted music, unless it is for personal use. The infringements include penalties of thousands of dollars and jail sentence is also possible. In the USA the copyright belongs to the composer and it is created from the moment that the composition is â€Å"fixed in any tangible medium of expression†1. So if one wishes to download that composition, it is recommended under the provisions of the US Copyright Law and the DMCA that he does it from an authorised legal site, by purchasing it from the provider. Furthermore, peer-to-peer sharing is also prohibited under the law regulations. In Canada, on the other hand, music downloading

Racial stereotype of young black males which lead to their death by Term Paper

Racial stereotype of young black males which lead to their death by shooting by people in authorities - Term Paper Example Black males are the hottest target for racial profiling, and thus, many young black males have been victims of racial profiling in the history of Africans in America. African-Americans have been victims of racial profiling since the trans-Atlantic slave trade in the 1850s. Why males of African descent face racial profiling in today’s American society is not simply a matter of expression of ethnic practices; rather, it goes back to the convoluted race and gender histories reflecting transformations in social and political processes, resulting in oppression that occurred in conflicting ways, and generated a system of white oppression and racial profiling (Johnson & Stanford, 2002, p.207). After the slaves got integrated into the American society, the Americanization created a new tension. This made them lose their traditional customs and practices, and they lost their identities in the new world. Examples include Sean bell and Travon Martin, who became victims of police brutality. Travon Martin was â€Å"the unarmed teenager allegedly killed by a neighborhood watch captain while walking home from a store† (Lee, 2012, para.1). Hence, racial profiling has become an American tradition, because black males have been targeted, shot, gunned down, punished, and tortured, just because of their race. Racial profiling is a social problem because it is giving disadvantage to black males in the community, which is a violation of human rights. If it continues, black males will have no place in the community, and they will go on suffering like inferior beings, becoming scapegoats for every crime and every illegal activity going on in the society. Supporters of racial profiling state that racial profiling is not an aspect of racism; because, it explains that someone is more likely to be a criminal if his appearance matches a particular race. However, even this definition has disadvantaged the blacks, since they have been

The Purpose Of Theory In International Relations Philosophy Essay

The Purpose Of Theory In International Relations Philosophy Essay International Relations (IR) theory aims to provide a conceptual framework upon which international relations can be analyzed. Ole Holsti describes international relations theories act as a pair of colored sunglasses, allowing the wearer to see only the salient events relevant to the theory. An adherent of realism may completely disregard an event that a constructivist might pounce upon as crucial, and vice versa. Robert Coxs ideas on the purpose of theory in International Relations, is not a search to find the truth but it is a tool to understand the world as it is, and to change it through the power of critique. According to Robert Cox, theory has two purposes: one of them is the problem-solving purpose that is synchronic which deals with the givens and tries to manage the smooth functioning of the system. The other kind of theory is the critical theory, and the purpose is to become aware of the situations not chosen by one, and to establish an emancipatory perspective. Once looked from the Coxian lens, it is clear that the discipline of international relations were from the very beginning loyal to this kind of purpose in theorizing, i.e., the smooth working of the system. As Robert Cox articulates, Theory is always for someone and for some purpose; this statement reflects the context in which the theory is being analyzed. Robert Cox says in one of his interview, What I meant is that there is no theory for itself; theory is always for someone, for some purpose. There is no neutral theory concerning human affairs, no theory of universal validity. Theory derives from practice and experience, and experience is related to time and place. Theory is a part of history. It addresses the problematic of the world of its time and place. An inquirer has to aim to place himself above the historical circumstances in which a theory is propounded. Cox has analyzed various theories and he critiques the earlier theories for their absolutism. He presents three challenges to previously established theories of IR.   Firstly, he appreciates the holistic intent behind both neorealism and world systems theory but warns against drawing conclusions which may detract from true formulation of a holistic approach.   Secondly, the state and social forces ought to be considered jointly in order to understand the route created by historical processes.   Finally, he argues for an empirical-historical methodology that accommodates and explains change more effectively than neorealists historical positivism. All theories derive from a perspective which determines their purpose.   By that Cox means all theories are colored by the time, place, and culture which produced them.   Cox identifies two strains of theorizing, the first, problem-solving theory, employs the existing theoretical framework and political conditions in order to isolate and address issues.   Conversely, critical theory is reflective, rejecting the false premise of a fixed social and political order, which Cox asserts is a convenience of method that constitutes an ideological bias in favor of the status quo.   If the purpose of political and social inquiry is indeed to effect change, critical theory is best suited towards that mandate, as a guide to strategic action cognizant of the history and ideology which inevitably impacts theory.   Problem-solving theory restricts the theorist into (perhaps inadvertently) perpetuating the status quo.   That being said, Cox acknowledges (in accordance with his belief tha t theory belongs to its historical climate) that there can be a time and place for problem-solving theory. Problem solving takes the world as it is and focuses on correcting certain dysfunctions, certain specific problems. Critical theory is concerned with how the world, that is all the conditions that problem solving theory takes as the given framework, may be changing. Because problem solving theory has to take the basic existing power relationships as given, it will be biased towards perpetuating those relationships, thus tending to make the existing order hegemonic. What critical theory does is question these very structural conditions that are tacit assumptions for problem-solving theory, to ask whom and which purposes such theory serves. It looks at the facts that problem-solving theory presents from the inside, that is, as they are experienced by actors in a context which also consists of power relations. Critical theory thus historicizes world orders by uncovering the purposes problem solving theories within such an order serve to uphold. By uncovering the contingency of an existing world order, one can then proceed to think about different world orders. It is more marginal than problem solving theory since it does not comfortably provide policy recommendations to those in power. The strength of problem-solving theory relies in its ability to fix limits or parameters to a problem area, and to reduce the statement of a particular problem to a limited number of variables which are amenable to rather close and clear examination. The ceteris paribus assumption, the assumption that other things can be ignored, upon which problem-solving theorizing relies, makes it possible to derive a statement of laws and regularities which appear of general applicability. Critical theory is critical in the sense that it stands apart from the prevailing order, and asks how that world came about. It does not just accept it: a world that exists has been made, and in the context of a weakening historical structure it can be made anew. Critical theory, unlike problem-solving theory, does not take institutions and social power relations for granted, but calls them into question by concerning itself with their origins, and whether and how they might be in process of changing. It is directed towards an appraisal of the very framework for action, the historical structure, which the problem-solving theory accepts as its parameters. Critical theory is a theory of history, in the sense that it is not just concerned about the politics of the past, but the continuing process of historical change. Problem-solving theory is not historical, it is a-historical, in the sense that it in effect posits a continuing present; it posits the continuity of the institutions of p ower relations which constitute the rules of the game which are assumed to be stable. The strength of the one is the weakness of the other: problem-solving theory can achieve great precision, when narrowing the scope of inquiry and presuming stability of the rules of the game, but in so doing, it can become an ideology supportive of the status quo. Critical theory sacrifices the precision that is possible with a circumscribed set of variables in order to comprehend a wider range of factors in comprehensive historical change. Cox believes that Critical theory does not propound remedies or make predictions about the emerging shape of things; world order for example. It attempts rather, by analysis of forces and trends, to discern possible futures and to point to the conflicts and contradictions in the existing world order that could move things towards one or other of the possible futures. In that sense it can be a guide for political choice and action. Cox sums up the salient features the purpose of the Critical Theory as follows: 1.  Action is never absolutely free but takes place within a framework for action with constitutes its problematic 2.  Not only action but also theory is shaped by the problematic 3.  The framework for action changes over time and a principal goal of critical theory is to understand these changes 4.  The framework has the form of an historical structure 5.  The framework is to be viewed from the bottom or from the outside in terms of the conflicts which arise within it and open the possibility of its transformation Having outlined his theoretical perspective, Cox explicates the role of historical structure in the formation of world orders, paying particular attention to hegemony. a structure is defined by its potentials in the form of material capabilities (technological, organizational, and natural resources) and ideas (historically conditioned intersubjective meanings and conflicting collective images of social order) institutionalization, which reflects and entrenches the power relations evident when particular institutions arose, is linked to the Gramscian concept of hegemony. In a hegemonic structure, the dominant interests secure power by co-opting the weak as they express their leadership in terms of universal or general interests these processes are not static; rather, they are limited totalities of a particular time and space which contain the dialectic possibility of change; that is, social forces, forms of state, and world orders can all be represented as a series of dominant and eme rgent rival structures = Social forces, hegemony, and imperialism interact as states mediate global and local social forces, establishing the political economy perspective in which power emerges from social forces and ideas, institutions and material capabilities are assessed on these three levels Cox then discusses the internationalization of the state as fragments of states evolved to become the primary units of interaction in developed states this represents the ascendancy of state ministries as independent actors, while in the periphery the power rests with international organizations. International production is engendering a global class structure which co-exists with national class structures, led by the transnational managerial class. Workers have also been fragmented into non-established and established, working respectively in international and national production, creating problems for social cohesion. Future world order prospects are presented in three hypothetical situations based on configurations of social forces with varying implications for the state system. Firstly, there is the possibility of a new hegemony based on internationalized production, suggesting a continued primacy of international capital and interests in both the core and the periphery. Conversely, a non-hegemonic world structure of conflicting power centers may emerge if neo-mercantilism rises in the core, creating a climate of cooperation with a particular core state for each periphery country. Finally, Cox does not rule out the possibility of a counter-hegemony based in the periphery, resulting in the termination of the core-periphery relationship which is entirely contingent on increased development in the periphery. Coxs strength lies primarily in his thorough assessment of historical examples without downplaying the role of history as neorealists do with their picking historical facts out of a quarry approach. Moreover, his re-orientation and reframing of international relations theory as a normative, emancipatory exercise establishes the discipline as a source of progress, rather than a cottage industry justifying the status quo. Critical theory emphasizes the political aspect of political science, reminding students and observers that each theorist (or diplomat) must contend with their own personal and cultural prejudices as human observers of politics cannot divorce themselves from their subject matter. Ultimately, critical theorys value rests with its reflexivity and hope for progress. Let us take an example to understand the applicability of this statement in real life scenario. Let us look at Climate change as a scenario and apply the statement and the theory relevance. With the example of climate change, the question is not to choose between problem-solving or critical theory. Problem solving theory is practical and necessary since it tells us how to proceed given certain conditions (for instance, the consequences to be expected from carbon generated from certain forms of behavior in terms of damage to the biosphere). Critical theory broadens the scope of inquiry by analyzing the forces favoring or opposing changing patterns of behavior. In the example of climate change, problem-solving theory asks how to support the big and ever increasing world population by industrial means yet with a kind of energy that is not going to pollute the planet. It requires a lot of innovative thought, has to mobilize huge reluctant and conservative social forces within a slow moving established order with vested interests in the political and industrial complex surrounding existing energy sources. Problem-solving theory gives opportunity to innovate and explore new forms of energy. Critical theory would take one step further and envisage a world order focused not just on humanity but on the whole of life, taking into account the web of relations in which humanity is only part in our world. Humans have to come to terms what it means to be part of the biosphere, and not just the dominant feature. In fact, it is a big problem of Western religion and modernist enlightenment thinking alike that nature is seen to be created in service of humans in the first, and is a force to be dominated in the second. Both Western religion and modernism have analytically disembedded humans from nature, turning nature into something to be dominated or an abstracted factor of production. To rethink this, to make humans part of nature, implies seeing humans as an entity with a responsibility vis-à  -vis the bigger world of which they are a part. Conclusion One has to question about the intent, the goal and the purposes of those who construct theories in specific historical situations. Broadly speaking, for any theory, there are two possible purposes to serve. One is for guiding the solving of problems posed within the particular context, the existing structure or the status quo. This leads to a problem-solving form of theory, which takes the existing context as given and seeks to make it work better. The other which is called critical theory is more reflective on the processes of change of historical structures, upon the transformation or challenges arising within the complex of forces constituting the existing historical structure, the existing common sense of reality. Critical thinking then contemplates the possibility of an alternative. We need to know the context in which theory is produced and used; and we need to know whether the aim of the user is to maintain the existing social order or to change it? Ever since, Coxs work has inspired critical students of IR and International Political Economy to think beyond the boundaries of conventional theorizing and to investigate the premises that underpin and link international politics and academic reflection on it. Recognized by many as one of the worlds most important thinkers in both IR and IPE, Cox assembles impressive and complex thinking stemming from history, philosophy, and geopolitics, to illuminate how politics can never be separated from economics, how theory is always linked to practice, and how material relations and ideas are inextricably intertwined to co-produce world orders.

Ascendency Through Knowledge Essay -- Intellectual History, Sociology,

Ascendency through Knowledge New Atlantis begins with the apparent utopian society successfully synthesizing scientific endeavor and achievement with Christian theology. This revelation is only half-hearted; Bacon’s true motive is nothing less than the subversion of Christian scholastic dogma and replacing it with material wellbeing through scientific scholarship as outlined in Bacon’s works. Through proper method a different kind of knowledge could be acquired liberating human destiny from divine intervention. Bacon’s knowledge empowers mankind reducing suffering and improving our wellbeing. â€Å"Wherefore, as in religion we are warned to show our faith by works, so in philosophy by the same rule the system should be judged by its fruits, and pronounced frivolous if it be barren,† (New Organon, Bacon, 12) Bacon in the 17th century elevated the measure for knowledge where it must be able to produce useful works separating itself from the past. Intellectual history as a discipline and as a way of thinking about the world has a history. Ideas and ways of thinking and ways of understanding the world have a history. Considering the history of human achievement whether we are talking about political history, economic history, military history, and gender history nothing compares in raw measure to our living history. This history includes what we think is possible or what is impossible. How we think about the world determines our relationship to it. Human thought has a history, which the way we think in modern times is not the way people have understood it or thought about it. Humanity changes how we think about the natural world, what is out there to be known? What is the stuff of the world? Why things happen? What is good evidence?... ...ist Bacon explains is a wise man or member of Solomon’s House where after receiving the heavenly manuscripts falls to his knees and remarked, â€Å"†¦to those of our order to know thy works of creation, and true secrets of them; and to discern, as far as appertaineth to the generations of men†¦.† (Bacon, New Atlantis, 67) Bacon outlines knowledge not from deduction from authority but induction from the distinct events in nature. Through patient observation we may form considerate thoughtful generalizations, where we may test these generalizations always refining and always open to new avenues of experimentation. Bacon’s Knowledge is verifiable and productive, the New Atlantis was dedicated to human knowledge and with it the technological progress that empowered humanity this view was in contrast to the scholastic perspective of an unchanging, contemplative universe.

Administrative Competence of Local Officials Essay

Explain what mechanisms would you suggest to improve the administrative competence of local officials to make local government units effective partners of the national government in the development of the country? With the changing concept of local governance, the local government personnel should be qualified and highly trained for their enabling or facilitative functions. A basic question that is raised is, do they have the competence to perform the enabling functions of local government? In the Philippines, both national and local governments have the responsibility to develop and improve the competencies of the local government personnel. The Civil Service Commission (CSC) and the Local Government Academy (LGA) of the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) are mandated by law to build HR capabilities at the local level. See more: Beowulf essay essay The CSC either conducts training activities through its regional 8 offices throughout the country or through its accredited training institutions. Through its regional offices, the CSC has been conducting courses for all state workers which cover the following general areas: supervisory, middle management, clerical or secretarial, technical or professional, values development, employee development, induction, and orientation or reorientation. To develop optimistic work attitudes among the state workers, the CSC offered and administered values development programs which included the Alay Sa Bayan (Offering to the Nation) training program. The CSC has also been touching base with the local government executives through the various Local Government Executive For a. Through this mechanism, the local government executives are updated on the latest civil service laws, rules and regulations and other relevant provisions of the Code. The program is focused on developing and strengthening the managerial and leadership skills of local officials. Training programs are designed to enhance skills and knowledge of employees to make them more effective in their jobs. These are centered on orientation and reorientation; values development; updating of skills for supervisors, middle managers, clerical force, and technical or professional employees; and personnel development. These imply that the kind of training that they receive would make them more effective service providers.

What Ethical Issues Does Ethnography Raise How Might We Deal with These?

Ethics can be defined as a â€Å"set of moral principles and beliefs that govern a person’s behaviour or the conducting of an activity† with its main principle of doing ‘good’ and preventing harm (Oxford Dictionaries: 2011). However Orb et al (2002:93) states that Ethical issues can best be described or expressed as the â€Å"tension between the aims of research to make generalizations for the good of others, and the rights of participants to maintain privacy. Ethical issues and moral dilemmas are seen to arise in almost any type of research concerning human participants; in quantitative, biomedical, psychological, anthropological and sociological research. The infringement of some ethical issues which arise are considered to be more serious than others; however in order to minimise these ethical dilemmas, researchers must follow and obey a strict set of ethical guidelines in order to protect and minimise harm caused to participants or research subjects.Ur ie Bronfenbrenner suggests that there is no way of conducting research without breaching the principles of professional ethics, and that the only way of avoiding such dilemmas is to cease the conduct of any research (Fine 1993:267). Clearly there a variety of differing ethical dilemmas which occur in research, however those which arise in ethnographic research are in complete contrast to those ethical dilemmas raised in biomedical or quantitative research, where some might suggest that ethical problems are greater (Alder et al 1986).Punch (1994) goes further in suggesting that qualitative studies such as ethnography rarely, if ever, raise ethical issues (Orb 2000:93); however this statement is heavily debated. This essay aspires to discuss and analyse the ethical issues which arise in ethnography and discuss how valid and harmful these issues really are. The paper will also seek to discuss how researchers may overcome these ethical dilemmas and as to whether they are really effectiv e means to dealing with the issue.However, firstly this essay will commence by giving a brief history of ethics, draw upon problems concerning the ethical review board guidelines and outline two contrasting dimensions of ethics. Today ethics are seen to be used as a tool to guide and direct research studies, however it seems that before the mid 1950’s research studies gave little regard to ethical guidelines or their research subjects causing a great deal of harm and distress to individuals and cultures (Akeroyd 008:133). An extreme example of this happened in America, from 1932 to 1972, many African American people where deliberately left untreated for syphilis as researchers wanted to find out what would happen if the illness was left (Orb 2002:93). Questions are today raised as to whether these studies should be disregarded as so many ethical issues and dilemmas were raised in pioneering research.However, today research studies are under strict regulation and scrutiny from ethical review boards, that have developed guidelines and controls which must be obeyed during any type of research. In the US, the Institutional review board (IRB) review all federally funded projects and require the researchers to follow a strict set of rules whilst conducting their studies, such as informing their participants of the objectives of research, obtaining consent from participants, protecting them from harm and so forth (Murphy and Dingwall 2007:340).However the ethical guidelines set by Institutional Review Boards have been criticized greatly by many social scientists claiming that the codes set have been designed around biological or quantitative models of research which are totally inapplicable nor relevant to social research and in particular ethnographic studies (Akeroyd 2008:147). Social scientists argue that the ethical guidelines set are not sensitive to ethnographic research and due to this may cause harm to individuals or groups studied; further they argue that the guidelines are liable to constrict research unnecessarily (Murphy and Dingwall 2007).In ethnographic research it would seem that ethical dilemmas are strongly correlated to the ontological and epistemological foundations of the research. However there seem to be two differing dimensions in explaining ethical issues, firstly is the concequentialist approaches and secondly there is the deontological approaches and in order to accomplish good quality research both approaches must be regarded. The consequentialist approaches are primarily concerned with the outcomes of the research and as too whether the participant is harmed during the study, and if they were, did the ends justified the means?The deontological approaches are on the other hand concerned with the participant’s rights, such as were they treated with respect, informed consent and did were their rights to privacy and autonomy attained (Murphy and Dingwall 2007:340). Many presume that these approaches are in competition however they are not because in actual fact these two contrasting approaches work in sync in order to protect participants from harm whilst also respecting the rights of participants.Beaucamp et al (1982) were one of the first to consider the consequentialist and deontological approaches and devised a list of ethical principles to be complied with when conducting research (Murphy and Dingwall 2007:340). In their list of principles BeauChamp et al noted Non-maleficience, Beneficence, self-determination and justice. They noted that Non-maleficience, requires the researcher to protect participant from harm and Beneficence suggests that the research must discover and obtain something of significance from the research for it to be ethical; these two approaches fall under the consequentialist approach.The deontological approaches outlined by Beaucamp et al are Self-determination, where the researcher must respect participant’s views and beliefs and Justice where the res earcher is required to treat participants as an equal to themselves. Here firstly the consequentialist approaches to ethics will be discussed. Unlike in biomedical research, if harm occurs within ethnographic fieldwork it is likely to be indirect rather than direct.When biological scientists are testing new drugs or surgery they directly put the research participant under risk of harm and the harm will occur during the procedure; however in ethnography the harm which occurs is not so obvious, visible or direct. It would be foolish to think that ethnographic field work was free from the problem of endangering participants; as it can harm individuals, but just not in the same way as biomedical research. In ethnographic field work if harm has taken place, then the participant will most probably not feel the effects until after the study has ended.In ethnography, if participants are ever harmed, they are usually harmed when the research studies they have participated in have been publis hed or publicized (Murphy and Dingwall 2007:341). The reasons which lie behind this are due to the fact that once the work of an ethnographer has been published they have no control over how individuals read or interpret their work and how other people will use their work in the future (Akeroyd 2008). Through the publication of the researchers work research subjects can be put under a great deal of stress, apprehension and embarrassment and through this their confidence and self-worth can become damaged.Participants may become embarrassed about views they hold if they sense that the researcher disagrees with their outlook or if the researcher makes it apparent that they are surprised that they hold such views. Furthermore this embarrassment and anxiousness caused by research may be likely to increase if the media hype the publication of the study, even in cases where the participant’s identity remains anonymous (Murphy and Dingwall 2007:347). An example of a study where the r esearch subject was embarrassed and harmed through the publication of research is ‘Whyte’s Street corner society study’.Richardson (1992:114) writes about ‘Docs’ reaction after reading what was said about him in the study, he suggests that Doc was embarrassed about what was said about him and his sense of pride and self respect was damaged. After the publication of the study ‘Doc’ pleaded with Whyte never to reveal to anyone who he was and to keep his identity anonymous. Boelen writes how ‘Docs’ sons believed that the Street Corner study ruined their father’s life (Richardson 1992:115).In response to this criticism some social scientists have suggested that ethnographers and their participants should work in partnership when producing reports (Murphy and Dingwall 2007). Others have suggested that too deal with such problem, all studies should present their participants with the right to reply. Some research subjects h ave sent letters to their local papers in response to publications they have taken part in. (Slack 2011) Another way in which ethnography is seen to cause harm is through offering ‘tools’ to those in power.Governments and army’s have been seen to use ethnographers in order to manipulate communities and cultures for both economic and political gains. These bodies of power have used ethnography to control those who are weak and powerless. Burgess (1985) suggests that â€Å"ethnographic studies increase knowledge of the adaptive behaviours that actors use of their feelings† (Murphy and Dingwall 2007:341), and we see examples of this happening today. The American department of defence have invested $40 million into a programme they consider to be a â€Å"Crucial new weapon† in their war against the Taliban in Afghanistan. They have hired ocial scientists and anthropologists so that they can grasp an understanding of tribal relations; and as this is seen to be working they are now looking to expand this ‘human terrain team’ (Rohde 2007). The head of the human terrain team see’s the work conducted as vital and defines it as a â€Å"scholar warrior† and as â€Å"rare work of applied scholarship† (Times Higher education 2010). However although it would seem that many anthropologists are happy for their work to play a vital role in shaping military and foreign policy a great number are in firm opposition and are against the militarization of anthropology.Some believe this program is unethical, dangerous and ineffective. They believe it to be unethical as it breaches many ethical codes of practice such as no informed consent and can cause great harm to the research subjects (Network of concerned anthropologists). As previously noted, ethical guidelines state that research should only be authorized and carried out, and is only deemed as ethical if the study has some significant anticipated benefits. Howe ver in ethnography this is a problem. Predicting and anticipating the outcomes and potential benefits prior to research studies is proven to be extremely difficult.In biomedical studies these are much easier to predict and more obvious. However in favour of ethnographic research the risks are not as likely to be as damaging as those displayed in biomedical research (Arskey 2008). It would seem that many would consider that the emotional harm as a result of ethnographic research is far less damaging that that of physical harm such as the testing of new surgery seen in biomedical research; however ultimately the researcher has less control over the participant (Thorne 1980).Harm could also be said to occur in ethnography due to the difficulty in preserving anonymity, as it is clear that no ethnographer can guarantee this. This is due to the fact there is a possibility that field notes transcripts might be read (Murphy and Dingwall 2007). However a suggestion to counteract this problem would be that once researchers have finished with such documents they should destroy them at the earliest possible point they can so that no prying eyes see the information.Furthermore it would seem that there is only ever a small number of qualitative ethnographic research studies ever carried out, and when research is conducted in an overt manner participants will know that the study has taken place and therefore when the work is published will be able to easily identify themselves or their society in the published work. It could also be argued that the close emotional relationships which are formed during ethnographic studies are harmful to research subjects.Unlike in quantitative and biological research, qualitative ethnographic research offers the opportunity for participants and researchers to form close relationships during the period of the study (Richardson 1992). However, when the study finishes and is completed, usually more often than not, the relationship and friendshi p between the participant and the observer also end. This in turn is harming the participant as they are experiencing a loss. Again an example of this can be drawn from the Street Corner Society study conducted by Whyte. Many wonder how ‘Doc’ must have felt after Whyte left, after spending so much time with him.Did ‘Doc’ feel hurt? Because we know that one of the most important thing in ‘Docs’ life was friendships (Richardson 1992:116). Researchers must be careful of the cathartic effects of ethnographic research as the process of legitimise deviant behaviour can be damaging to society, as people may begin to think it is okay to act in such a way. Fine (1993) states that the research conducted on the extremely racist group of the Ku Klux Klan were guilty in doing this. He suggests that the researcher in this study â€Å"dehumanized their informants placing them outside our moral community in the guise of justice† (Fine 1993:272).The rese archer adopted a sympathetic stance to the views of group, and this is clearly not always a positive characteristic, and can be considered to be unethical. In contrast to biological and statistical research, ethnographic work is based on observations and interpretations of what they see. Clearly the researchers own beliefs and values may influence what they write, and what they chose not to write about in their reports. There is much evidence supporting this notion. Fine (1993:227) suggests that readers who believe what they see in quotations marks are foolish because how do they know that is what actually was said or happened.He suggests that maybe what we sometimes see put in quotation marks are lies and misunderstood interpretations. This can be damaging to research subjects or communities under study as they may be portrayed as people they’re not e. g. racist. A programme on Channel 4 called â€Å"Love thy neighbour† is a prime example. In this reality TV show, the village people partake in choosing who gets to live in their village, and as a black family were voted out, these individuals are now portrayed as being racist.However in response to this criticism it could be said that this type of research is ‘conscious raising’, and may get individuals to think twice about their actions and behaviour (Hammersley and Atkinson 1995). The Deontological approaches and dimensions of looking at ethics usually take in to consideration the participant’s rights to privacy respect and self determination that may be infringed. The discussion about privacy and rights within research has been bought to the fore front after the antagonistic response from some previously studied communities, participants and native anthropologists (Murphy and Dingwall 2007:343).Some make the assertion that the rights of the participants are not always regarded just because they have signed a consent form (Akeroyd 2008). Others go further in saying that cons ent forms don’t really protect participants; they are devised primarily to protect the researcher in an event of law action, and in many cases after signing consent forms participants will still be unaware of what the research is about and what their rights are. It is suggested that these consent forms will just reinforce the unequal relationship between the research and their subjects (Homan 1980).Furthermore Price (1996) believes that â€Å"consent forms risk jeopardizing anonymity making people more identifiable† (Murphy and Dingwall 2008:343). Ultimately consent don’t guarantee the total protection of participants identities (Akeroyd 2008). However Bulmer (1980) is a great believer in informed consent, and believes it to be an essential part of any research. Bulmer (1980) is a critic of covert research and argues that this method of research can cause a great deal of harm to participants whilst also violating their rights and autonomy; he sees this type of r esearch as a betrayal of trust.Edward Shills goes further and suggests that this invasion of privacy is a nuisance as it interferes with individual’s lives and cultures (Homan 1980:52). Furthermore critics argue that those who carry out covert research are reinforcing the idea that all social scientists are devious and untrustworthy. However although ethical review boards guidelines and some critics believe that covert research is unethical and breaching the rights of participants, Homan and other supporters of covert research believe that in some cases this research method is acceptable to use, for example a study on secretive communities.Several researchers have adopted the covert role and Laud Humphreys and his ‘Tea Room’ study is one of the most notable; however this study was subject to much scrutiny once it was published as it was seen to be breaching a tremendous amount of ethical guidelines. Questions are raised as to whether it is ethically right to dece ive participants’ but also is it ethically right that research subjects don’t get to know anything about their researchers background as they know so much about theirs. Researchers rarely disclose personal information and if they do some lie.Diane Wolf (1996) claims that many ethnographers have lied about marital status, national identities or religious beliefs; and she is one of those, as during research she lied about her marital status to her research subjects (Denzin & Lincoln 2003). Moral and ethical questions are raised asking whether it is right and proper for the researchers to have all the power in shaping, designing and undertaking studies; researchers are portrayed to be more competent due to this. It is queried whether this is really appropriate? (Denzin & Lincoln 2003).However feminist argue that to evade such a problem the research subjects should be involved in the planning stages of research and have a say in the types of questions asked. However the pr acticality and sensibility of this idea is questioned, is this really an appropriate way of dealing with the problem? Many argue not. Some suggest that this would be impractical and some participants might not want to contribute. It has further been suggested that this is an obscene idea because at the end of the day it is the researcher who has the final word on what is going to be researched (Murphy and Dingwall 2007).Although it would seem the power status between the researcher and research subjects is less reinforced and not so clear within ethnographic research in comparison to other kinds of research; there are some concerns raised about the way that ethnographers can objectify, manipulate and take advantage of research subjects either during the period of the study or in published work. However some argue that the researcher controls are not in fact a breach of the research subjects’ independence and rights, and is not manipulative in anyway (Hammersley & Atkinson 199 5).On the other hand Fine (1993:284) proposes that it is sometimes the case where female ethnographers are objectified rather than the research subjects, due to the fact we live in a sexist world. Moreover Murphy and Dingwall (2007) argue that in some cases it would seem that the research subjects manipulate and exert power over the researchers conducting ethnographic studies. They propose that this happens through refuting the researcher the privilege of conducting research on themselves or their community or through manipulating what they study and not allowing the researcher to have full responsibility and say over the research.However, although it is questionable whether there is a problem of power imbalance between the research and their research subjects, feminists have suggested ways of dealing with this. They attempt to readdress power imbalances in relationships between the researched and researcher, by not enforcing the power the researcher has and balancing relationship s tatuses, making relationships more intimate and authentic (Murphy and Dingwall 2007).However, other critics have replied to this suggesting that the development of closer, sympathetic relationships are far more unethical and dangerous as manipulation on the researchers behalf becomes far easier as participants are more likely disclose thoughts and feeling to whom they feel close to. Furthermore participants may not wish for a relationship with an individual who is researching them (Akeroyd 2008) Once the researcher has published their research findings they usually gain scholarly recognition and financial benefits, whereas the studied groups or individuals gain nothing on this level.As Richardson (1992: 116) points out Whyte is recognised as the single author to the Street Corner Society and â€Å"received all the fame and fortune†, but questions are raised queering if the publication of the study would have been possible at all without ‘Docs’ help . The fortune made in the Street Corner study could have improved ‘Docs’ life a great deal, and a small percentage of the financial could have changed his life. However once the study ended ‘Docs’ fortune did not change, as he remained jobless for practically the rest of his life and living on the bread line.However it would seem that some researchers believe that through giving participants feedback and insight to the research moral dilemma of their financial and scholarly gains are resolved. On the other hand other ethnographic researchers may not feel that this enough and share the royalties from their published work (Slack 2011). Finally a further ethical dilemma concerning ethnographic research methods is that all the data and publications are based primarily on the interpretations made by the researcher, but it is queried whether the researcher has the right to do so (Hammersley & Atkinson 1995).As Calvino (1998:257) states, communities or subjects can become †˜confrontational’ if they feel that the interpretations made of them are inaccurate and mistaken. Murphy and Dingwall (2007) claim that for research to be ethical they must produce accounts that convey the research subjects standpoints and views. However it is argued that ethnographers can and do sometimes take advantage of their empowered roles and construct their own versions of events and interpret data in ways they wish to display such groups.However in order to overcome this dilemma, it has been recommended that researchers should back their analysis and understanding with proof and verification that what was said and done did really happen (Akeroyd 2008). Therefore in conclusion, it is evident that ethnography can and does raise some ethical dilemmas causing harm and infringes the rights of many participants; however it is the duty and obligation of researchers to minimise these effects, even if they hold negative views and dislike the research subjects.Furthermore it is somewhat clear that ethnography can give valuable insights in to unexplored cultures and individuals, however on the negative side it is also seen as a damaging ‘tool’ used by those in power . It is obvious that today, unlike in the past, practically all research abides by ethical guidelines, set by ethical review boards and if they don’t researchers are held liable. Nevertheless, in the near future it is imperative that ethical guidelines should be amended so that they are specific to the issues surrounding ethnography. It is clear that this is the only way that ethnography will be almost fully ethical.