This post examines some of the technology-related issues raised by the riots in England in early August 2011, and some of the lessons we can learn for those events.

The spates of riots, looting and property damage across England last week, from 6 to 10 August, have left policy makers wondering whether more controls are necessary to limit technology from fuelling such destructive activities. Much of the focus has been around the use of BlackBerry Messenger (BBM) and social networking sites to fuel and coordinate the unrest. Also being debated are the powers available to the police to quickly quell those disturbances and to gather the requisite evidence to secure criminal convictions.

While some of the proposed measures might be a knee-jerk reaction to how coordinated and sustained the rioting was, when cooler heads prevail, it is still possible that the UK will introduce stringent provisions to better address such occurrences. Currently, the police are busy rounding up suspects and the courts are trying to process those who have been arrested, but it might be prudent to consider some of lessons that can be learnt from a technology perspective.

Immediacy of electronic communication

Current technological advancement, along with the widespread availability of telecoms devices, especially mobile and smartphones, has increased the immediacy of electronic communication. No longer is it necessary to wait days, hours or even minutes for feedback, it now occurs in seconds. Plans can be formulated and implemented relatively quickly, with a very small window of opportunity for interception or for countermeasures to be executed.

Further, there are a variety of options available for personal broadcast, thus allowing one person to share his/her views with many at once, and vice versa. This arrangement inherently fosters a sense of community among those who are part of the group, which can also be used to garner support for some common purpose.

The impact of social networks and mobile technology

Very early reports of the riots indicated that social networking sites, such as Twitter and Facebook, were being used to fuel the unrest. However, later, BBM was identified as the main medium through which the uprisings were coordinated and persons were informed where to assemble. Unlike most social networking platforms, which allow public or open communication, BBM offers a similar service to BlackBerry users, which is secure, private, encrypted and free.

Social networking options for smartphones and other mobile devices have been highly welcomed, as they allow us all to keep connected with others, without the need to be anchored to a PC. With regard to BlackBerry, whose greatest asset is providing secure connectivity to corporate users, the popularity of its handsets among the general population in the UK (and even in the Caribbean) means that there is a sizeable customer base using its facilities and services.

Technology/social networks cannot be blamed

Soon after the riots started there was a clamour for social networking sites to be banned, and even for BBM to be switched off in the UK, but it would be ill-advised to blame technology for those events. Instead, it must be acknowledged that technology can be used for both good and bad purposes.

For example, a few months ago, when there was the uprising against years of oppression in Egypt and the Internet was shut down, Twitter and Google, in particular, facilitated news dissemination on the happenings there. At that time, the technology was heralded as a critical factor in the changes occurring in North Africa and the Middle East. Similarly, in England, while BBM and social networking sites may have been used to coordinate and incite last week’s violence, those same channels were also used to rally the affected communities and to organise clean up of the streets.

Impact of technology on personal freedoms

The events in London and its environs highlight the continuing tension between, among other things:

  • an individual’s right to privacy and other personal freedoms on the Internet
  • the anonymity that some technologies inherently provide, and
  • the redress available to the police when technology has been used to commit crimes.

This situation can be considered quite acute since, more often than not, law enforcement agencies are grappling with how technology is being used to commit crimes or to engage in other destructive behaviour. To that end, a number of governments worldwide, including Saudi Arabia, Russia, India and China, have been pressuring technology developers and providers, most notably Research in Motion (the maker of BlackBerry), to provide them with access to its customers’ private or encrypted communications. Hence the conflict between “personal rights” and “the greater good” is yet to be resolved, and is still being widely debated at meetings on Internet Governance.

Final remarks

To varying degrees, the attention paid to the use of technology during the riots in England overshadowed the fact that there are a number of social/societal problems in the UK (as in many other countries). More importantly, and as reflected in the earlier points, technology is a tool – it is providing new and different mediums through which the human condition can be expressed. Online social networking have been so successful because it has been able to tap into our innate need to share and for kinship, whether among friends, followers, or even gangs.

___________