TM: In Panel 2 this stood out visibly in that researchers could feel that they tend to feel invisible, unrecognized as they deal with data, give their best only to be left in the cold which is a death blow to morale when you are just referred to as an African researcher. The counter argument came in Panel 3 where matters invisibility in data came out when researchers like those working with IDRC when funded seldom consider the fact that the data they collect belongs to IDRC, which is a trend that recommended to other institutions to handle copyright issues. This data retention and copyright balance between the researcher and donor organization tips the scale against over-research as data is already had how they share and make the data accessible is another question altogether.
PC: One take: “in digital spaces, you can be very invisible… an anonymous African researcher.” In this sense, greater connection flattens key aspects of one’s identity while boosting other aspects (e.g. one’s university affiliation might become more important)... As a result, some kinds of (elite) identification may become elevated in importance while marginalizing others.
AO: some topics heavily researched but some other areas under worked on; connections not made (such as the networks and people that connected today).