The London Riots and the ensuing blame game

2011 is proving to be the year of extreme news events that explode either without or seemingly without warning in rapid succession. Think of how the New Zealand earthquake was followed by the Arab Spring and then Japanese tsunami and nuclear leak. Most recently we’ve experienced Hackgate followed by the Riots.

One interesting common feature of all these stories has been how the media – and sometimes the PR industry – has become fixated on putting  the biggest tech brands at the heart of the story. So we have seen Twitter and other social media praised for helping coordinate the Arab Spring uprisings, but criticised for helping the country’s looters play cat and mouse with the police.   And opportunities to redeem the same social media have arisen as Twitter, Facebook et al are praised for helping to coordinate community clean-ups by the Riot Wombles. But then might those same Riot Wombles turn into tomorrow’s Twitter vigilantes? And so the news and PR agenda swings the other way.

Actually, the role of mobile technology and social media in recent events is less interesting than we realise. I liked what a London Evening Standard columnist said recently about how blaming mobile phones and Twitter for the London 2011 riots is as ridiculous as blaming the Brixton 1980s riots on the push button telephone. Similarly, social media supported the Arab uprisings but the reasons for its’ momentum and success have very little to do with Twitter or Facebook when you consider the importance of protesters’ personal bravery or the unwillingness of some state organisations to hold back from doing their governments’ dirty work.

Quite obviously such technology is useful for criminality and rioting – as is it for more usual law abiding uses – but it does not give us much insight into why these events occurred. It is lazy politics and journalism to heap much significance on how restricting social media will stop riots recurring.