Three arguments to oppose government social media interference

Earlier this week I recorded a video podcast for PR Week looking at the PR impact of the government’s meeting this Thursday with Facebook, Blackberry and Twitter about the role these networks played in the riots. Stay tuned for the video, out tomorrow!

As I’ve alluded to before, the government’s attempt to place any sort of blame for the riots on ‘social media’ is absurd and these, in my opinion, are the main reasons why:

1. The freedom of speech argument – Would we be happy with attempts by the government to shut down other forms of communication, like phone networks or the postal service? Would we all be going along with this in the same way if one of the nation’s major newspapers was being censured? This country is built upon the fundamental rights of freedom of speech. We might not always like what is being said, but we all have a right to say what we believe. Now of course, if illegal activities are publicly broadcast as a result of this, then the perpetrators of these comments should be punished, but don’t blame the messenger or the communication channel used. Cameron is merely pandering here to, as Jeff Jarvis says, the demonisation of technology and the scaremongering of publications such as the Daily Mail. The Western world has been quick to judge dictators abroad that attempt to close down communication channels and, while the government is clearly not attempting to undertake anything like this, it is a precedent we just shouldn’t set. If the government really feels that social media is to blame for what happened on the streets of Tottenham, then we’re in all sorts of problems!
2. The futility argument – Wherever you sit on the freedom of speech argument, there is one act that remains, if you close down BBM or Twitter, users of those networks will just go elsewhere and find another means of communication. And, in many cases, this could make the job even harder for the security services. Tweets and Facebook messages are trackable and traceable, with the police using many of them to hunt down and convict offenders.
3. The more good than bad argument – I’ve lost count of the number of ‘good deeds’ that were carried out on or using social media both during and after the riots happened. The fact is, there are far more people using social media for good than bad. Do we want to let the bad actions of some ruin all the positive stuff?

Danny Whatmough