Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 146 posts

Re: In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban

#91

Post by forensic »

petercooper wrote: post #73
cybo wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a distinction to be made here. Libya had a large proportion of protestors in comparison to rioters. More importantly, the motivation was solidly political. There was a clear goal and demand for greater freedom. In contrast, the UK rioters that spawned out of the initial protest was nothing more than an assortment of various criminal groups that used a political excuse to attack and rob ordinary citizens.

I don't know why you're being voted down. I'm in the UK and you're right. If the rioting was being spun as being somehow politically motivated in non British media, that's wrong. There were no political goals here. People wanted new trainers and TVs and a fun night out getting chased by the cops.

>People wanted new trainers and TVs

That's a resource distribution issue intimately related to the economy. If that isn't politics, nothing is. Almost all riots are related to resource distribution issues, especially when an impoverished underclass engages in looting.

Are you really claiming these riots aren't linked to the massive cuts to public services that happened during the last year?

Re: In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban

#92

Post by [deleted] »

ThomPete wrote: post #86
[deleted] wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[deleted]

I think your description of them says a lot about your arguments nature. I mean of course the parent are to blame, but since they too belong to what you describe as underclass they simply do not have the mental surplus. If you have kids you will know how hard it can be to control their whereabouts. And as far as I can se, no one is claiming it's an excuse. It's an explanation. You can then as you do choose to disrega…

[deleted]

Re: In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban

#93

Post by mojuba »

dmor wrote: post #88

Maybe they should focus on enforcing the laws they have, not forming special committees to write more. I have to believe it is against the terms of service of all these apps to conspire to commit crimes or participate in criminal activity using Twitter, Facebook, BBM, etc. Would they propose shutting down telephones, text messaging, and all other forms of communication (snail mail, singing clown telegrams, monkey but…

Just yesterday some commentator on Sky said it's the television to blame in the first place, for spreading a message that looting gets away without punishment. Internet and mobile communication came into play only after that.

Re: In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban

#94

Post by arethuza »

nodata wrote: post #80
[deleted] wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[deleted]

I think that poor parenting is to blame, partly. We can argue how much it is to blame another time. Sticking with parenting: I don't think saying "[bad parenting] will always exist" is constructive or helpful. What's important is that there is less bad parenting over time. So if it would be a good thing to have better parenting the question becomes what would have to be done for this to happen?

There were also some examples of good parenting - one chap handed himself in to police because his mother recognised him on television and forced him to give himself up.

Re: In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban

#95

Post by [deleted] »

ordinary wrote: post #85
[deleted] wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[deleted]

Once "criminals" have a bright future and a job, they probably won't be criminals any more. I think that's a good thing for everyone involved. I say "criminals" not to imply that what these people do isn't criminal (it is), but because dividing the world into criminals and good law abiding citizens is a false dichotomy. Normal people sometimes do criminal things and criminals sometimes to things that are good. Additi…

[deleted]

Re: In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban

#96

Post by forensic »

cormullion wrote: post #64
awakeasleep wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought about this sort of thing. It almost seems like the underclasses in Britain are less civilized than the people of the countries that have had recent revolutions. However, I also believe that the riots in Tunisia weren't limited to lower class people, and maybe involving a larger section of society in them caused them to be more civilized.

Everyone is starting to generalize wildly about 'Britain'. London + Birmingham is not the same as Britain. The problems of urban Britain are not the same as the problems of Britons outside the major cities. London has 13% of the population. As a member of the underclass in Britain, I resent being called uncivilized. Well, I would if I didn't have a sense of humour. Now, where's my nearest Apple store.

You write too well to be part of the underclass. The underclass is uneducated, mentally ill, has limited access to social services.

The real underclass doesn't come to Hacker News; the real underclass typs lik dis- u no- txt speak

Re: In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban

#97

Post by ordinary »

[deleted] wrote: post #95
ordinary wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once "criminals" have a bright future and a job, they probably won't be criminals any more. I think that's a good thing for everyone involved. I say "criminals" not to imply that what these people do isn't criminal (it is), but because dividing the world into criminals and good law abiding citizens is a false dichotomy. Normal people sometimes do criminal things and criminals sometimes to things that are good. Additi…

[deleted]

Unless you're planning on keeping them there forever, that's not a solution, just a postponement.

Re: In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban

#98

Post by FireBeyond »

forensic wrote: post #91
petercooper wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know why you're being voted down. I'm in the UK and you're right. If the rioting was being spun as being somehow politically motivated in non British media, that's wrong. There were no political goals here. People wanted new trainers and TVs and a fun night out getting chased by the cops.

>People wanted new trainers and TVs That's a resource distribution issue intimately related to the economy. If that isn't politics, nothing is. Almost all riots are related to resource distribution issues, especially when an impoverished underclass engages in looting. Are you really claiming these riots aren't linked to the massive cuts to public services that happened during the last year?

The same impoverished underclass with access to Blackberry's and smartphones with data packages who can't afford to put new shoes on their feet?

Are you really claiming this?

Re: In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban

#99

Post by liedra »

bradgessler wrote: post #77
jwr wrote: post #63

"free flow of information can sometimes be a problem" — I never thought I'd hear these words from a British PM.

Yeah, wow, I'm dumbfounded. If the British government follows through with this, the rioters will actually have a new reason to riot: freedom of speech.

Not that I agree with the knee-jerk reaction put forward by Cameron, but actually, protesters will protest. There's a big difference between rioting and protesting, and it's important to make that clear.

Re: In wake of riots, British PM proposes social media ban

#100

Post by forensic »

estel wrote: post #7
dendory wrote: post #6

To us, Libya protesters are freedom fighters, to the Libian government they are criminals. No surprise that when the protests happen here, governments swap position right away.

This is a slightly tired and broadly awful analogy. The rioters this week haven't shared the same motivations, determination or moral conviction of "rebel" (but now recognised) Libyan Government. If I were Libyan, this comparison would be frankly insulting.

How do you know this? I sure hope you aren't unquestioningly swallowing what the state run media tells you.

Have you talked to any rioters? Have you entered their homes and seen how they lived? Maybe if you got to know them you would think up some reasons why they would be angry and feel like burning and robbing.

Maybe those reasons would be something like recent austerity measures further condemning them and their children to a life of abject poverty in one of the richest places in the world.

Maybe those reasons would be lack of access to decent education, medicine, mental health services.

A democracy that is widely seen as unrepresentative and broken where social mobility has been declining for 40 years.

How about an utter lack of job prospects while a consumer culture bombards them with media that tells them they are worthless for being trapped in a cycle of poverty.

At a certain point your underclass realizes that their only hope of ever getting nice shoes (and by extension, respect from society) is by taking those shoes.

Cmon London, you are smarter than this. Are you TRYING to bring back Marxism? Or does the English upper class not fear the guillotine?

Post reply on HN