Before Recording History, Build Trust: Rapport and Ethics in Oral History

The doorbell rings, and a young person in their twenties, carrying heavy equipment bags and a tripod, steps into the home of an eighty-year-old elder. The moment unfamiliar gear is set up in the middle of the living room, the elder’s expression stiffens: “What if I say something wrong and ruin this young person’s project?” “What if some embarrassing story from my past ends up circulating across the internet?”

If we press record before this anxiety and tension have faded, we risk capturing superficial, rehearsed answers rather than the vivid, living memories of Korean Canadian immigration history. The success of the Oral History Project for the Cyber Museum of Korean Canadian Immigration History is not determined solely while the cameras are rolling. True history begins when the microphones are turned off: in the process of building prior rapport to foster trust between the elder and the interviewer, and in establishing a safety net that protects the narrator both psychologically and ethically.

Here, we present our tenth preparation guideline—both warm and rigorous—where our core philosophy that “ethics and empathy must come before technology” shines brightest.

1. Making Eye Contact Before Lenses and Microphones: Rapport Built Over a Cup of Tea

In counseling psychology, “rapport” refers to the mutual trust and emotional connection built between two people. The 100 first-generation pioneers and the 20 younger interviewers come from different eras, with distinct ways of speaking and expressing themselves. To bridge this generational divide, the very first step for an interviewer is to step out of the role of an “investigator” and become a caring companion ready to listen to another human being’s life.

On the day of the shoot or during an advance meeting a few days prior, interviewers begin with casual, everyday conversation before unpacking any recording gear whenever possible. They sit across the kitchen or dining table, sharing a warm cup of tea offered by the elder. “Your grandchild in that family photo in the living room is so lovely,” or “It’s quite chilly today; are you feeling comfortable?”

These simple, everyday exchanges deliver a silent yet powerful message: “I am not here to extract data from you. I respect you as a whole person, and I am genuinely here to listen to your life and memories.”

When elders come to trust the interviewer through this preliminary connection, their tension gradually softens, creating a safe space where they can naturally open up about memories they might not otherwise share.

2. “Your Life Belongs to You”: Informed Consent Grounded in Respect

While warm rapport serves as the bedrock of psychological safety, formalized research ethics guidelines provide the institutional safeguards that protect an elder’s rights. One of the most vital steps in an oral history project is reviewing and signing an informed consent form prior to recording, thoroughly explaining every detail.

However, this consent form must not read like dense bank terms and conditions laden with legal jargon. Interviewers must explain the document’s purpose and the scope of how the recorded material will be utilized in clear, accessible language tailored to the elder’s perspective.

“Dear elder, the precious stories you share with us today will be featured in the Cyber Museum as educational resources for future generations. Before we record and preserve your history, we want to explain thoroughly where and how it may be used, and seek your full and willing agreement.”

Only when they fully understand (Informed) how their narratives will be used and freely give their agreement (Consent) can elders let go of vague anxieties and participate proactively as the true owners of their documented lives.

3. The Right to Decline and Protecting Sensitive Memories

Alongside moments of pride and accomplishment, the lives of first-generation immigrants often carry painful and bitter memories: harsh encounters with racial discrimination, betrayal and fraud by people they once trusted, and hardships endured amidst dire poverty. These are wounds they may never wish to reopen.

The core of our ethical guidelines is to clearly remind elders of their right to decline any question they do not wish to answer: “If any of my questions touch on memories that are too painful to revisit or that you prefer not to have on the record, please feel free not to answer at any time. You can skip questions or pause the interview whenever you wish. We will always respect your choices.”

By clearly affirming their right to say no at any point, elders can engage with the project confident that their boundaries are honored. Deepening trust does not mean they are obligated to divulge their most vulnerable memories; the decision to share must always remain entirely in the narrator’s hands.

Extra care is also essential when narrators mention real names while discussing past conflicts or sensitive community matters. To prevent future friction within the diaspora community or potential privacy infringements, the team must evaluate the scope of public release and consider anonymization, consulting closely with the narrator to implement appropriate protective measures whenever necessary.

4. Post-Interview Follow-Up and the Right of Withdrawal: Ethical Companionship to the End

The ethics of an oral history project do not conclude when the camera shuts off. Genuine protection must extend well beyond the recording session. An elder might speak freely and comfortably during the interview, only to have second thoughts a few days later: “The more I think about it, the more embarrassed I feel. I’d really like that part taken out.”

When this occurs, the Cyber Museum team must never offer a bureaucratic response such as, “You’ve already signed the consent form, so we cannot make changes.” The project must establish clear policies in advance on how to handle requests for revisions, deletions, or withdrawals before materials are published, as well as what steps can be taken afterward, communicating these transparently to narrators.

It is equally crucial to incorporate a “member checking” process, where the edited content is reviewed together with the narrator. During this review, both sides can ensure that the context and nuance of statements are accurately reflected, verify factual details, and confirm that sensitive personal information has not been inadvertently exposed. The scope of review and criteria for processing revision or deletion requests must be carried out transparently under predefined project guidelines.

This process serves as an indispensable ethical measure that treats narrators not merely as research subjects, but as active authors of historical memory, safeguarding their dignity throughout.

Empathy and Ethics: The Warmest Foundation for Chronicling History

The Cyber Museum of Korean Canadian Immigration History is made possible through the generous participation of 100 elders who are entrusting us with their lives and memories. Our utmost responsibility is to ensure this process creates no unnecessary burden or anxiety, providing a welcoming environment where every participant’s rights and dignity are honored.

The empathetic rapport cultivated by offering a teacup before turning on the microphone, combined with rigorous research ethics that place the narrator’s well-being above all else—when these two elements work in unison, the 20 young interviewers become more than questioners; they become trusted chroniclers of history.

The poignant, tear-stained, and glorious history of immigration that flows from our elders’ voices will, upon this foundation of warm empathy and steadfast ethics, endure as an invaluable legacy preserved for generations to come.