Research: Disclaimer for authors
The research (and other) sections on NewgonWiki aim to create an anthology by quoting research papers and other publications that use a wide variety of methodologies and represent an even wider variety of standpoints. While each individual review page starts from a premise, our intention is to allow readers and researchers to digest the broadest possible range of literature (we cite hundreds of papers) and come to their own conclusions, measuring those against our summarized positions at the top of and throughout each page.
It therefore follows that we do not agree with the entirety of each paper or publication we mention, nor are we in endorsement of the authors and any other statements they may have published or made in other formats. It also follows that we do not expect those authors to be in agreement with our ethos, or seek to imply that they might be.
Removal of material from NewgonWiki
We have a policy of not removing material from NewgonWiki unless it is a complete copy (we rarely host these) and we have been asked to do so by the author/copyright holder. As academics will be aware, the quoting format used throughout NewgonWiki's research sections is fully compliant with all applicable laws and conventions.
Complaints, and alternatives to removal
Considering the above, and what is already known within academia about the process of assimilating and developing discourse, we prefer authors to be upfront about their reasons for requesting changes to the way their material is presented on NewgonWiki:
1. Editorial comments misrepresent my work.
This, when substantiated, is a valid criticism - although we use direct quotes in most instances to avoid this complaint. An editor will be assigned to work with you to ensure that your work is represented accurately, contextualizing the spirit in which it was conducted.
2. I really don't like the optics of having my work listed on NewgonWiki.
This is an honest and direct complaint, and what we believe actually underpins most complaints stated with a differing rationale.
In this case, however, we can not just remove material from NewgonWiki, as that would be counter to not only our aims, but the spirit of Western scholarship, and rights enshrined in International Convention. However, instead of restricting discourse, we are open to the idea of expanding it in order to ensure that the authors we cite are at ease with the way their work has been presented. What we can therefore do in some cases, is post an Author's Response on a separate page to be linked from the excerpt or citation.
A second solution, that may be available in a very small number of cases is exchanging an excerpt feature for an inline citation. This may be possible if one of our editors wants to redesign a page, and believes that your material is better summarized in an editorial comment, or used to support a factual claim. These are likely to be lower profile than excerpt features and may also be disclaimed as peripheral in some way to the main thrust of a research list.
Alternative courses of action
There are yet more courses of action that authors themselves can take to reduce the possibility of their work being used by activists:
- Publish new findings that discredit the previous ones (after carrying out the necessary investigations).
- Publicly disown statements you have made, either here (as above), or on social media/in the press. If you are the first to point out your errors, it will put you in a far stronger position if a journalist, writer or activist uses your previous work to discredit you in the future.
All of these may in turn influence our willingness to cite an article.