Last year
Britain suffered the worst civil unrest seen in the country for decades, as
riots spread out from London to other cities around the country. Attention at the time focused on the role of
technologies such as Blackberry Messenger played in supporting the looting on
display, with some politicians calling for social media to be shut down during
such social troubles.
As a
libertarian I'm very much opposed to such actions, so it was with much relief
when researchers found that social media plays a positive role in riots rather
than a negative one.
This
hypothesis has been further supported by new research. The paper, titled “Social Media Censorship
in Times of Political Unrest – A Social Simulation Experiment with the UK
Riots,” suggests that far from helping calm civil unrest, if governments were
to censor social media it would actually fan the flames further.
This is
according to two European researchers who built a computer model showing that
high levels of censorship (e.g., Hosni Mubarak’s decision to turn off Egypt’s
Internet) result in sustained periods of violent activity, whereas no
censorship leads to spiky periods of violent outbursts broken up by relatively
long periods of relative calm.
It's timely
as of course the same tools many claim were responsible for the liberation of
people during the Arab Spring, are portrayed by western governments as a threat
to the values of freedom and peace they supposedly stand for.
The authors
attribute their findings (albeit computer-generated) largely to the idea of
“vision,” which plays a pivotal role in sociological experiments trying to
determine how individuals act during times of protest or rioting. Put simply,
less censorship means more vision, so citizens (called “agents” in the computer
model) know what’s going on around them and can act in more uniform and
rational manners. More censorship means less vision, so citizens are less aware
of their surroundings and tend to act randomly.
It is of
course worth remembering that social media is merely a tool for communication
and sharing. Riots happened before
social media arrived and the underlying reasons for such mass actions have
remained much the same down the years.
A Guardian
analysis of individuals arrested during the U.K. riots in August, for example,
found that rioters were overwhelmingly “young, poor and unemployed” (read “more
disenfranchised than ordinary citizens”). And even before the advent of social
media, non-violent protests have been the norm in the relatively stable and
rich United States for decades, with only minimal violence breaking out during
the Occupy protests that took hold in dozens of cities nationwide during 2011.
No comments:
Post a Comment