Informed consent among analog people in a digital world

This paper addresses the concept of informed consent when working with remote, non-literate groups. By examining both the legal and moral obligations of informed consent, it will be argued that “erring on the side of caution”, for instance by not publishing on the Internet because the consultants/community do not have exposure to such things, is just as paternalistic as assuming that they would consent if they understood. It is further argued that the researcher has an obligation to explain the research to the consultants/community as fully as possible and to engage in an ongoing negotiation of consent, but that the researcher must respect the autonomy of the consultant/community decision, even if the consent was not fully “informed”.