Send message to Author

Paper short abstract:

If ethnography means ‘exploring the world from others’ points of view’, a pandemic might act as radical equaliser. This is discussed in a case study on digitising museum experiences, which also contributes outlooks into potential sustainable ‘outputs’ from experimental research designs.

Paper long abstract:

As global lockdowns halted everyday processes, 'alternative everydays' emerged to attract scientific intrigue. My current project derives from lacking insight into how digitising museum spaces and formats could lastingly provide access to museum experiences, possibly to other groups than established modes.

Our team experimented with new paths into museums, e.g. 360° live-stream guided tours which theoretically limited access barriers to an internet connection. Participant Observation in experiments asked I take on the role of a visitor to join the guide at the museum through my device. Thus, visitors trialled in a new way of ‘doing tour participation’ in which codes of conduct needed renegotiation. What the subsequent (online) Focus Groups and a collaboration with external evaluators brought up was striking, if not surprising: The digital infrastructure, hard and soft, which enables ‘more democratic access’ adds another layer of discrimination that extends beyond the binary of (not) having any access at all.

Herein, I ponder the pros and cons of online qualitative research alongside the new challenges faced by hybrid biases that we bring along with me as a WEIRD researcher. Moreover, the project’s invention, initially a potential tool for cultural organisations during closure times or to widen audience pools, might play a role in future research. I consider video-diary-based ethnographies '2.0': Participants can become guides into their world and showcase what’s important to them to more than one researcher at once and to an audience of those whom they want to ‘let in’ at a distance.