100 Questions / 36
Where is the boundary between the privacy of a third party (named by the narrator) and the commitment to the historical event?Machine Translation Edited By Mandana Karimi
2026-07-01
We asked several researchers and activists in the field of oral history to express their views on oral history questions. The name of each participant is given at the beginning of their answer, and the text of all the answers will be published on this portal by the end of the week. The goal of this project is to open new doors to an issue and promote scientific discussions in the field of oral history.
In this project, a question is asked every Saturday, and we ask experts to present their views in the form of a short text (about 100 words) by the end of the week. All the answers will be published together so that the audience can compare and analyze the views.
The content is the opinions of the senders and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the Oral History website. Although the answers are supposed to be around 100 words, in order to be polite and not to leave the discussion incomplete, in some cases, more than this number of answers will be accepted.
This time, we asked the experts to send their answers by Sunday night so that all the answers can be published on Tuesday.
From the intertwining of these answers, using artificial intelligence, we have arrived at theories about oral history that will be published in the near future.
Question 36:
Where is the boundary between the privacy of a third person (whom the narrator mentions) and the commitment to the historical event?
____________________________________________
Answers to Question 36:
Mohammad Mehdi Abdollahzadeh
Privacy has multi-layered roots in philosophy, law, politics, anthropology, and sociology. This concept is based on the fact that people tend to keep parts of their lives hidden and inaccessible to others, and the decision to disclose or not to disclose them is their own responsibility. Because unauthorized access to these parts can harm them. However, the exact definition of privacy varies in different societies and depending on the social and political situation of individuals. Ignoring this principle, even if the narrator is forced to enter this area, will have negative consequences for him. Therefore, even in the most accurate historical narratives, the privacy of others should not be violated under the pretext of specific goals; rather, the privacy of third parties should be protected by using methods so that the audience cannot identify those people through the data contained in the text.
Hassan Beheshtipour
One of the major challenges in oral history is how to deal with third parties mentioned in the narrator’s narrative. In these cases, the researcher must balance two fundamental values: the commitment to recording historical reality and respecting the privacy and rights of individuals. This is because there is no clear boundary between the two, and decision-making in each case requires attention to ethical, legal, and methodological considerations. The researcher must find ways to reduce the conflict between recording the narrative and preserving the rights of individuals by employing mechanisms such as informed consent, the right to review and amend the narrative, managing access levels, and paying attention to cultural and social contexts. It must also answer this question. Because the simple solution of referring to third parties and including their responses in a footnote or margin of the text is not consistent with the nature of oral history. The best solution is to adhere to the principle of “narrative independence,” meaning that each person presents their own narrative in the form of an independent document. Accordingly, the researcher’s task is not to judge between narratives, but to provide a professional, fair, and safe environment for recording and preserving multiple narratives from the past.
Gholamreza Azari Khakstar
Privacy has always been a major challenge in oral history interviews. It seems that the existence of such issues distinguishes oral history narratives from other historical sources. Sometimes narrators refer to the individual characteristics or characteristics of individuals in their narratives, effectively invading their privacy. If this invasion of privacy helps to better understand the historical narrative, it is a matter worth considering and important, and has been less addressed in other historical sources. In oral history, since the goal is to express the obvious and hidden aspects of events, sometimes it is impossible to ignore the privacy of the people involved in the narrative; this helps the interviewers to have a more accurate understanding of the event, although the editors take special considerations into account when publishing the final text.
Abolfazl Hassanabadi
This issue is considered a fundamental challenge between ethical requirements and the commitment to representing the historical event. According to the international standards of oral history, respecting the dignity and status of the interviewee takes precedence over other considerations in any situation. This is the point where the ethical and legal boundary is formed, where the privacy of third parties, the security of the narrator, and the commitment to historical truth intersect. Regardless of the standards used or the purpose of conducting oral history (whether for archival or publication purposes), the fundamental principle in this area is based on this rule: whenever the disclosure of information about a third party causes actual or potential harm, privacy takes precedence over the obligation to the narrative; but whenever the omission of that information disrupts the correct understanding of the historical event, the obligation to the truth takes precedence. It should be noted, however, that maintaining the balance between these two principles is very difficult and may differ at the interview stage or at the time of publication of the work.
Abolfat’h Mo’men
In oral history interviews, narrators usually name multiple people who witnessed or were involved in the event. Mentioning the names of these individuals should be limited to their role in the historical event and only to the extent necessary to help clarify the issue, not to sideline the essence of the event. The narrator should not enter into the personal and private discussions of individuals, and their privacy should be respected; he should only express observations and contributions, not the analyses of others. The oral historian and editor can also help to enhance, authenticate, and verify by mentioning the names in the footnotes and make the text polyphonic. It is also possible to organize a collective re-reading by using these names to get closer to the truth of the event. Finally, any accusations, projections, and untrue statements about individuals should be avoided.
Shafiqeh Niknafs
The necessity of conducting research cannot be a license to damage the privacy of individuals. According to the laws in Iran, disclosing personal information without the consent of the information owner is considered a violation of privacy. In oral history, defamation and slander of individuals in an interview is considered a crime if it is published. This crime is not only the responsibility of the narrator, but also includes the interviewer and project officials. Oral history interviews do not have immunity from legal prosecution, and in the event of a complaint and a legal order, the interview must inevitably be submitted to a legal authority. If the interviewee states something that could be harmful to others mentioned in the interview or violate their privacy, the interviewer or oral history project are obliged to limit access to the interview in terms of time or be able to defend the claim by presenting evidence to the curt.
Seyed Mohammad Sadeq Feyz
Here, more than any other point, we come closer to the boundary between honest narration and morality. Since the produced text is the result of all the processes that have gone through the path of scientific research in order to be used for this purpose, it must necessarily have both elements of honesty and morality. However, using indirect methods of quoting and, as much as possible, without mentioning the names and characteristics of the third party or using pseudonyms, and of course emphasizing the unreality of the names of people or even the places of occurrence, is necessary simply to keep the third-party unknown and to preserve his privacy.
Hamid Qazvini
Basically, it is difficult to determine and recognize the inclusive boundary. Some people may not consider it permissible to present certain matters in order to respect privacy, while others may consider it necessary to express the same things due to the social status and influence of that person. It seems that it is better to pay attention to a few things in this section. First, the information must be about the event, that is, it must be related to the event in some way. Second, the material must be from the public part of the individuals’ lives, and third, the narratives must not harm the third party’s position and must not legally cause material or moral harm to him or his family.
Gholamreza Azizi
Privacy has different limits and boundaries in the laws, regulations, and customs of different societies, but in general, this concept means the right of individuals to control others’ access to their personal, physical, locational, communication, and private decisions. Respecting privacy is usually considered one of the moral obligations of oral history. Of course, in this regard, the limits and boundaries of privacy must be specified (for example, when there is a conflict between privacy and collective interests). The issue of respecting privacy is more apparent in the case of a third party, because unlike the interviewer and narrator, he is absent from the interview scene. Therefore, some believe that in order to publish cases in which the privacy of a third party is discussed, that part of the interview text should be sent to the third party and asked to write a critique or response to it. Then, the same response was published in the subtitle. Of course, the author of these lines believes that some claims regarding the third party are not printable and should not be published, even if we mention in the subtitle that "the responsibility lies with the narrator"
Artificial Intelligence
The boundary between the privacy of a third party and the commitment to historical reality is where mentioning that person, without playing a fundamental role in understanding the event, simply leads to revealing his private life. The narrator is allowed to mention personal details to the extent that the information is necessary to clarify the underlying cause or historical context. As soon as disclosure becomes marginal or immoral and violates the dignity of the individual, the commitment to truth gives way to a commitment to fairness and respect. The boundary is the public utility of raising awareness versus unjustified private harm. (DeepSeek).
Number of Visits: 13
http://oral-history.ir/?page=post&id=13356