I’ve read all of the statements from the various parties involved and still remain frustrated and angry as ever that a lot of this seems to stem from the fact that this was an utter failure from all the so-called adults. Fatima and Emily’s “study” was pretty flawed and yet +

it was allowed to be presented at a marketing conference? Why was it accepted without any peer review? I find it very troubling that ResearchBTS, Bangtan Scholars, R3 & others gave that study a level of legitimacy with their initial tweets of trying to explain Emily’s side and +

what ethnographic research is, etc that imo it didn’t deserve. It’s esp troubling to see how Bangtan Scholars, in their statement, said they didn’t see the study but still decided to tweet those explanations, almost vouching for that study (though it prob wasn’t their intention).

It was also sad to see how some researchers got defensive and lashed out instead of listening to the feedback, which was (from what I read) very good and polite. When you publicly present research, that usually means that you probably had to defend your work from multiple rounds+

of questioning. Honestly, I now find myself questioning ALL the studies that were presented at that October conference given the fact that this one was allowed to be presented. As for Neil Shah, when I read articles, I always think about who the audience is and what the purpose +

of the article is. It seems to me, he had already reached a conclusion and was looking for a source to legitimize his article/agenda. What better way than to get a fan who was also doing her own research into a similar topic? And I want to point out that had Fatima & Emily done +

an actual study with sound methodology on the topic, I think it would’ve been interesting to read. Anyway, I hope that researchers treat us with the level of respect that we deserve and they should know that ARMYs are a diverse group of people with varying opinions AND +

that we are also (for the most part) an intelligent group of people who have a healthy level of skepticism and will question everything. And that’s not something that should scare you as a researcher from publishing your work. That should motivate you to make sure your work is +

strong enough to withstand the scrutiny and questions. That also means you should learn the difference from trolls and actual constructive criticism and stop lumping all of us with feedback as toxic fangirls.

Apologies for the long rambling thread and have a nice day.