ETHICS OF INTERACTION
In order to track perpetrator conversation and publication activity, it is necessary to have active accounts on all relevant platforms and to build alerting methodologies using all available tools. From this monitoring process, hashtags, keywords, colloquialisms, and phrases can be harvested to allow for content searches.
While it is best practice to always, ordinarily, communicate your intentions to sources and uploaders, stating to them clearly the terms of use and the permissions being sought in the uploader’s language, the same cannot be said when it comes to perpetrator content.
Facebook community page administrators, activists groups and independent activists will be open to engaging with requests. However, reaching out to fighting groups and armed militias is discouraged. There is a risk the outreach may draw unnecessary attention to the researchers or to local sources that provided content or information as part of an investigation, or draw attention to victims visible in perpetrator content?
Perpetrator content is often publicly available, that is, published by a party, actor, or group for public dissemination, and often with the intention to do harm or for propaganda purposes. Observers should consider whether the benefits of publication or dissemination, whether by journalists or by human rights investigators, outweigh the risk that doing so will further the aims of the perpetrator.
If publication or dissemination is warranted, other considerations arise. Can you identify the victims to seek their consent before sharing the content? If you can identify them, could others, potentially to their detriment? Would publication or dissemination of the content put the victims, their families, or their wider communities at risk? Further discussion on this topic can be found in the ethical use of perpetrator content section.
Consider also the risks to which you may be exposing a source in reaching out to them publicly, or even privately. Set out rules of engagement for such public outreach for your team.
Also set out ethics guidance on how your organization’s team members will behave and be identified on social platforms, to avoid them misrepresenting their role or intentions online. It is important to be transparent and upfront in conversations with sources or content uploaders.
On traditional social platforms (Twitter, Facebook, etc) create user accounts that clearly identify who is behind the account and explain why you are reaching out to someone. Using closed platforms and messaging services, such as Telegram, WhatsApp, or similar platforms, is different: the user accounts are more easily made anonymous. When trying to gain access to groups or chats on such apps, does each member of that group understand the implications of sharing content with you?
Where publicly contacting a source may put a journalist or investigator at risk, shared accounts under the organization’s name may be appropriate.
If, while reaching out, you don’t identify either your name or your organization’s name, the work effectively becomes an undercover investigation. Extraordinary circumstances are required before such an approach is taken and, again, your organization should set out clear rules for the team to avoid the possibility of deceiving a source or misrepresenting the work.