true
true
Evaluating Communication Ethics
The Ethics of Using Research

Read the passage below and check your comprehension by answering the following questions. Then “submit” your work.

Six years ago, you and a group of dog-loving friends and neighbors cleaned up an abandoned lot and created “Central Bark,” a public dog run. With the help of a GoFundMe campaign and the city’s permission, members of the group installed fences, lighting, benches, and a fountain and organized volunteers to ensure the site is clean and cared for. But a few weeks ago, a child was bitten by a dog while walking near the park. Now local residents are concerned that the park is a danger to public safety; there have been calls to ban all dogs from the space. In hopes of keeping the dog run open, your group has asked you to come up with a few key arguments, backed up with solid research, to present to the local civic association at its next meeting.

Like others in the neighborhood, you want to keep dangerous animals out of the park, but you also know that this is the first incident in or around the park, and the dog involved was unleashed and outside of the dog run when the event occurred. You believe that the dog run is a valuable part of the neighborhood, not only because it provides pet owners with an enclosed place to let their dogs play, but also because your group transformed an unused, derelict lot. Prior to the dog run opening, the lot was a known location for drug transactions and the site of several assaults. Through research, you find there have been no such crimes recorded there since your group took over the lot six years ago. You are delighted by these statistics and believe that they prove that the improvements your group made have actually made the area safer than it was before. But further statistics you find show that, during the same time frame, drug-related crimes have plummeted across your town — not only at the lot location. If you just present the data for the location, you think you may be able to persuade the board to keep the park open, but you also know that your data may be flawed. What do you do?

THINK ABOUT THIS

1. Just how flawed is your data? Is it possible that the improvements to the lot really have had an impact on crime at that specific location? How might you find out?
2. What other ideas might you propose in order to ensure that dog attacks do not happen again? How can you ensure that only responsible dog owners use the park? What kind of evidence would you seek to support your proposals?
3. Bearing in mind that a child has been injured, is it possible that the park really should be closed? What kind of research should you conduct to obtain unbiased information on how dog runs like Central Bark impact public safety?