British PM proposes social media ban for rioters

bartoron · **Posted:** August 11th, 2011, 7:45 pm

http://www.cnn.com/2011/TECH/social.med ... ial.media/

That's definitely not going to help. :-s

bartoron

Magicana Drofulcus · **Posted:** August 11th, 2011, 8:10 pm

Nice sensationalist headline you got there.

Eadwulf · **Posted:** August 11th, 2011, 8:12 pm

I'd point out why this article is inaccurate, but frankly I don't want to get involved in the ensuing argumental backlash that'll arise from people complaining about this as well...

I think I might just go on holiday until the inevitable explosion of political stupidity from recent events in this country subsides.

Sarah · **Posted:** August 11th, 2011, 11:10 pm

"Cameron said that government officials are working with authorities "to look at whether it would be right to stop people communicating via these websites and services when we know they are plotting violence, disorder and criminality.""

social media ban? :?:

J@nr0k · **Posted:** August 11th, 2011, 11:41 pm

Sounds like something Iran tried to do but failed.

bluecoat · **Posted:** August 12th, 2011, 5:05 am

Sounds more like something the US did in WWI and succeeded. Not condemning or condoning, especially when Ead said the article is probably inaccurate, but I think there was a ban on any anti-government uses of free speech in the first world war. Don't remember much about it though, except that there were a few supreme court precedents. I'd have to read up on it again.

EDIT: Found it!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedition_Act_of_1918

Just a cursory glance, but the post master was allowed to go through mail to see if anyone had anything bad to say about the government in them. Sounds eerily similar to what the article was suggesting twitter, facebook, and blackberry do.

Phantomrose · **Posted:** August 12th, 2011, 9:29 am

I am unsure of this idea. I am guessing a lot of people will find reason to complain about it, if the ban is implemented.

Snake1235 · **Posted:** August 12th, 2011, 9:35 am

bluecoat wrote:

Just a cursory glance, but the post master was allowed to go through mail to see if anyone had anything bad to say about the government in them. Sounds eerily similar to what the article was suggesting twitter, facebook, and blackberry do.

Similar, yes, but Twitter, Facebook, Blackberry, etc. are private companies. It would be breaching more than just mail privacy in this case.

Anyway, from what the villagers that actually live in the UK are saying, the riots and looting are just people looting. It surprises me, though, that it's lasting this long and being (supposedly) as widespread as it is without it being more than that. Are these really just gangs of troublemakers, or is there actually protesting going on?

bartoron · **Posted:** August 12th, 2011, 10:38 am

Sarah wrote:

"Cameron said that government officials are working with authorities "to look at whether it would be right to stop people communicating via these websites and services when we know they are plotting violence, disorder and criminality.""

social media ban? :?:

I copied the title that was on CNN, but it appears the title of the article has since changed. :-s

bartoron

Simons Pure · **Posted:** August 12th, 2011, 11:22 am

Snake1235 wrote:

Are these really just gangs of troublemakers, or is there actually protesting going on?

Troublemakers. We call them chavs.

Aragorn Ix · **Posted:** August 12th, 2011, 3:33 pm

Snake1235 wrote:

bluecoat wrote:

Just a cursory glance, but the post master was allowed to go through mail to see if anyone had anything bad to say about the government in them. Sounds eerily similar to what the article was suggesting twitter, facebook, and blackberry do.

Similar, yes, but Twitter, Facebook, Blackberry, etc. are private companies. It would be breaching more than just mail privacy in this case.

Anyway, from what the villagers that actually live in the UK are saying, the riots and looting are just people looting. It surprises me, though, that it's lasting this long and being (supposedly) as widespread as it is without it being more than that. Are these really just gangs of troublemakers, or is there actually protesting going on?

Well compared to say the Rodney King riots in Los Angeles (1992) this is a cakewalk, I can confirm that absolutely no protesting is going on.

Dakota Lesmercy · **Posted:** August 13th, 2011, 12:43 pm

This could be really bad.....

People could riot about banning media for the rioters... kinda redundant in my opinion...

Dakota.

Nate · **Posted:** August 13th, 2011, 1:09 pm

While I agree this would be a breach of human rights, IMO the people who are using social networks to incite violence don't deserve to be allowed to use them.

If you have a problem with something the Government has done, there are far better ways to get your point across that don't involve innocent people getting seriously hurt.

Phantomrose · **Posted:** August 15th, 2011, 10:04 am

Nate wrote:

While I agree this would be a breach of human rights, IMO the people who are using social networks to incite violence don't deserve to be allowed to use them.

If you have a problem with something the Government has done, there are far better ways to get your point across that don't involve innocent people getting seriously hurt.

This is a good point.

British PM proposes social media ban for rioters

Who is online