MAIS 602

Research is always shaped by epistemology, since the questions we ask and the methods we use reflect particular viewpoints and assumptions (Chalmers, 2017). The term itself was new to me, but the concept was not. On some level, I had always understood the idea, even if I had never named it. Now that I can, it feels almost obvious: all knowledge is filtered through perspective, even in areas often treated as purely objective.

After completing six MAIS courses, including Theory 601, I see how these insights are deeply intertwined. The material has pushed me to question almost everything, making me more aware of how epistemology guides not only research but also daily ways of knowing. It shapes what we imagine as possible questions, what methods we treat as valid, and what knowledge we regard as correct (Chalmers, 2017). This awareness has led me to revisit my original research question and consider more carefully the perspectives it carries.

 

Original Question and Early Focus

 

My initial question asked: How does social media normalize neoliberal values by linking consumer choice to freedom and identity? While my original question was already fairly focused, it has since been refined. Initially, I was interested in how platforms like Instagram or TikTok present consumer choice as an expression of personal freedom and identity, but I had not yet determined what specific forms of consumer choice I wanted to examine.

In light of Unit 2 readings, professor feedback, and class discussions, I refined my question to focus on the wellness industry and the ways its products normalize neoliberal values. Wellness goods are rarely sold as simple commodities; they are packaged with promises of health, freedom, and happiness. A vacation package becomes a guarantee of family togetherness, while a supplement is framed as self-empowerment. These narratives blur the line between consumption and identity, embedding neoliberal values in what appears to be common sense (Jacobsson, 2019).

Neoliberal values, however, extend beyond advertising and online shopping. They are also embedded in the systems that define what counts as legitimate knowledge (Phelan & Glackin, 2013). Universities, research boards, and academia often privilege Western and capitalist ways of knowing while sidelining community-based or marginalized perspectives (Vallier, 2021). As Chalmers (2017) notes, knowledge systems reproduce capitalist values by marginalizing alternative epistemologies. This reminds me that methodology is never neutral. The same dynamic plays out in wellness content on social media, where certain narratives of health and self-improvement are elevated while community-based or collective understandings of well-being are pushed aside.

 

Ethical Considerations

​

The ethical implications are significant because the way research is framed can either reproduce exclusion or create space for marginalized voices. Balfour and Martel (2018) show how Research Ethics Boards can unintentionally control knowledge by privileging traditional methodologies and excluding marginalized voices. A parallel can be seen on social media, where wellness narratives that align with neoliberal ideals, such as clean eating or fitness retreats are amplified, while community-based understandings of well-being often remain invisible.

According to Bull et al. (2020), ethics should be seen as an ongoing relationship rather than a checklist. This perspective reminds me to stay mindful of how my work engages with neoliberal values. For instance, if I only analyze influencer campaigns promoting supplements as empowerment, I risk reinforcing the very discourse that ties health to individual consumer choice.

The Tri-Agency Framework (2016) also stresses that researchers carry responsibility for transparency and accountability. For me, this also means ensuring that identity is not flattened into a universal experience. Not all groups experience consumer choice in the same way: a wellness app marketed as accessible may assume a certain cultural background, lifestyle, or set of priorities, leaving out alternative experiences of health and well-being. My analysis must therefore remain attentive to these differences, creating space for perspectives that extend beyond Western neoliberal theory.

 

Refining My Approach

 

I now understand that discourse analysis itself must be carried out reflexively, with attention to the ethical implications of whose voices and perspectives are amplified (or overlooked). Without that awareness, even critical analysis risks reproducing the neoliberal assumptions it sets out to challenge (Jacobsson, 2019).

For this reason, I need to be cautious about relying only on conventional tools such as content analysis of hashtags and influencer posts, or on Western theories of consumer behaviour, without questioning how these methods may reproduce the very neoliberal assumptions I want to critique. The challenge is not only to critique neoliberal discourse but also to avoid reinforcing it in the process.

Overall, Unit 2 has shown me that ethics are not an add-on to research but a central guide. They shape the questions I ask and how I approach them, reminding me to be responsible, reflexive, and inclusive.