Are We Heading Towards a Social Media Clampdown?

Published on Thursday, 18 August 2011 15:41

	By Mel Morton Follow @Mel_Morton

In the aftermath of the riots debates about the role social media played in the shocking and violent displays of greed and aggression has become an ongoing, controversial topic.  

Rioters are known to have used the Blackberry messenger system, which is encrypted and untraceable, to organise the riots, along with the use of Facebook and Twitter.

In his address to the House of Commons David Cameron pointed the blame at social media networks.  “Everyone watching these horrific actions will be stuck (sic) by how they were organised via social media.”  

Concerns have been raised about a potential social media crackdown after the Prime Minister’s announcement that the government was working with the Police and intelligence services to look at whether it would be possible to cut people off from social media during times of unrest.

David Cameron stated that his view of internet-based communication is that social media “and the free flow of information can be used for good.  But it can also be used for ill.” 

Home Secretary Theresa May has called a meeting with the heads of Twitter, Facebook and the makers of Blackberry. She said, “Among the issues we will discuss is whether and how we should be able to stop people communicating via these websites and services.” 

The riots, which the Met Police have said were the “worst seen in current memory”, have seen record numbers of arrests. Several have included those believed to be using social media to incite violence.  

Hampshire Police announced: “Three people have been arrested in Southampton by police investigating the use of social networking to attempt to incite violent disorder.”  A third person was arrested on ‘suspicion of using the Blackberry Messenger service to incite violent disorder.”  

In Cheshire eight were arrested on suspicion of inciting public disorder through the use of social media sites. In Dyfed-Powys, a fifteen-year-old boy was arrested for incitement to violence after posting on Facebook.

Some arrests through social media verge on the ridiculous. A twenty year old from Essex was arrested and charged after allegedly using a Blackberry smartphone with the intention of organising a water fight. 

Similarly, the sentencing has been as brutal and verging on the absurd. Jordan Blackshaw, 20, from Northwich Town, and Perry Sutcliffe-Keenan, 22, of Latchford, Warrington were sentenced to 4 years in prison for setting up a riot facebook page. No trouble resulted from their actions.

In light of these arrests and David Cameron’s decision to send a “tough message” over the riots, defending the four-year jail sentences for inciting disorder on Facebook, the concern about a heavy-handed clamp down on social media seems credible.  

The riots caused widespread devastation, but is a social media crackdown going to prevent it in future?

Further questions have been asked in response to news that Research in Motion may pass on private information about Blackberry users to the government.

The media watchdog, Reporters Without Borders expressed grave concerns. “What consequences will this co-operation have on respect for the privacy of Blackberry users?” They added, “The provision of personal data to the police sets a “disturbing precedent” coming from a western nation which could have consequences as regards to 'setting an example for others kinds of government.'”

Jim Killock, executive director of the Open Rights Group, has been quoted saying that the government’s reaction “risked creating unbalanced laws and abuses of our rights.”

While politicians’ continue to play the blame-game, the Independent’s headlines captured this in Monday’s edition: “David Cameron blames children without fathers and schools without discipline.  Ed Miliband blames bankers and MPs for failing to set a better example for society.”

The concern amongst technology experts, social media followers and human right campaigners is that social media will become the scapegoat of the riots.  Despite previously criticising such behaviour in Libya, Egypt and China, many worry that the Government is using the actions of a few to sanction a crackdown on social media and a reason to intrude into our private lives.  

The message coming out of Number 10 is reactionary, with the coalition failing to acknowledge the positive impact social media has had during the riots.

The Greater Manchester Police turned to twitter to advertise their campaign to catch looters tweeting: “We are grateful for everyone trying to get #shopalooter trending check out the details at www.gmp.police.uk.”   

The London Metropolitan Police created a Flickr stream to catch the rioters. A Facebook page was set up: “Let’s catch the London 2011 rioters and looters,” and many of the clean up operations were organised through Twitter and Facebook, highlighting the beneficial involvement of social media.  For many living or forced to travel through the vicinity of the riots social media was frequently used to avoid riot hot-spots or make sure family and friends were safe.  

As people begin reflecting on recent events public opinions have already begun to change.  On Monday 15th August in a poll on the Computer Active website, voters were asked: “Would shutting down Facebook, Twitter and other social networks help to stop riots?” On that date 66 % voted ‘yes’ a shut down would stop the riots. By the 17th August, only 55% of voters believed ‘yes'.

Conservative MP Louise Mensch voiced her opinion on twitter that a “common sense” approach should be used with social media in such circumstances.  She tweeted that she’d support a “one or two hours shutdown at the height of a crisis as interrupt, if police needed it.”  In a later tweet she stated: “If riot info and fear is spreading by Facebook & Twitter shut them off for an hour or two, then restore. World won’t implode.”

But as the UK faces the possibility of social media restrictions and closure by the government, the questions we all now must ask include: how willing would you be during times of social unrest for a social media blackout?  Would you be happy for a one or two hour shutdown, or do you feel your liberty and freedom of speech are being threatened?   If you believe temporary shutdowns are acceptable, who would you trust to make that decision?  And what would the conditions need to be to invoke such an action?  

Now what remains to be seen is whether the government will continue to blame social media for the riots, taking the opportunity to challenge our right to freedom of speech. Or whether as the riots become a distant memory, their plans for a clampdown will simply fade.

Editorial Comment: The Government is failing to understand how communication works. In times of trouble, people have always found a way to communicate. Attempting to clamp down on it is not only barbaric and may incite more anger than it represses, but is ultimately futile. There's always a way around it. Suggesting otherwise suggests a naive view of technology. The Native Indians used smoke signals to communicate strikes. What does Cameron intend to do? Ban fire?

Relevant Links

BBC's Technology Correspondent talks riots

ComputerActive.co.uk criticises Social Media block

ATE's RachaelO shares Twitter tips