Those of us who had some small glimmer of hope that the incoming coalition might just be more well disposed to personal liberty than their egregious predecessors can finally snuff that little candle out now.
Following the riots, the home office is about to get tough with the messenger.
The major social networks have been called to the home office next Thursday to discuss the English riots.
What’s to discuss? It’s a policing matter. It may well be appropriate to discuss the immediate response with senior police officers and to make adjustments to their rules of engagement, but what has this got to do with Facebook, Twitter and Blackberry?
Okay, I’m being deliberately obtuse here. I know exactly why – it is because these media were used as a means of passing on messages. But, then, so what? The telephone can be used to pass messages, the postal system has been doing it for long enough, too. The only difference is the means of reaching a mass audience. So in practice these are different, but the principle remains the same; they are merely message carriers, they are not responsible for the content of the messages and nor should they be.
Facebook, Twitter and Blackberry have all been criticised after it emerged that some rioters may have used them to plan trouble or encourage others.
There is nothing to criticise. They didn’t plan the riots. That their media was used simply confirms that things can be used for good or bad by the people who access the service and the owners of the platform cannot be expected to police the millions of messages and pages involved.
David Cameron has said the government would look at limiting access to such services during any future disorder.
A typical facile knee-jerk reaction from a politician incapable of a rational response other than to use overt, excessive authority and punish everyone for the misdeeds of the dew. This makes him no different to David Blunkett.
It’s not clear yet whether the owners of Twitter or RIM are going to attend as only Facebook has openly commented. The appropriate response wouldeeb to tell Ms May to go forth and multiply – well, maybe not multiply, one is enough.
Prime Minister David Cameron sparked controversy when he suggested that the government might look at disconnecting some online and telecommunications services in the event of further civil disorder.
Addressing Parliament he said: “…we are working with the police, the intelligence services and industry to look at whether it would be right to stop people communicating via these websites and services when we know they are plotting violence, disorder and criminality.”
Never mind the ordinary innocent people using these services, let’s go for the brutal, Chinese method of control, why not? Why use a scalpel to deal with a problem when a ten pound sledgehammer will do the job just as well? And what about civil liberties? Yes, what about those?
Politicians, scum to a man and a woman.
Not very surprising, but still disappointing, especially given Cameramong’s fairly measured and sane response to Derrick Bird and Raoul Moat. Still, in some ways it’s nice that he’s now living down to expectations, meaning the gloves can come off and anyone who’s been holding back ’til now can abuse the bastard as strongly as they did his snot gobbling predecessor.
As for the major social networks, I’d hope they simply wouldn’t show up at the Home Office. What’s going to happen if they don’t? Let’s see the Cobbleition ban Facebook and Twatter, which no doubt have more members each than every British political party combined – and see what happens.
The other week there was a protest in San Francisco against the killing of a man by cops and they shut down the mobile phone network.
Change you can believe in, eh?
Shutting down ‘social media’ isn’t the solution. Using it is. The rioters are actively telling everybody where they are going next. All the Police have to do is surf the hashtags and deploy accordingly. 👿
Quite. I believe they did some of that last week.
I sincerely hope they do tell them to get lost but I’ve an idea they will try to co-operate in order to prevent legislation, much like the pubs and the smoking ban.
They always seem to forget that pleasing your enemy does not make them your friend.
I’ve recently been toying with the idea of fitting the car with a CB radio. I’ve held off because I intend to change my car in October when the tax runs out.
I was only supposed to be for a bit of a laugh, but I wonder if it may take on a new, more serious meaning.
@ Bucko – haven’t you heard of “Mag Mounts”?
I’ve still got a couple kicking around from my CB days. No need to drill any holes in the bodywork, just stick it on the middle of the roof. With some care you can shut the cable in a door jamb without crushing it. Fit a cigar lighter plug on the power lead and wedge the radio down the side of a seat – Bob’s your uncle!
This is the slimy fascism that is characteristic of the Anglosphere, the “Rule Of THe Threat Of Law”. No need to worry parliament with that democracy and passing legislation crap, you just invite people for a “chat”.
I don’t know which I find more disgusting; the fact that it goes on all the time, or the fact that nobody seems to care.