Shutting Down Social Media During Times of Emergency Would be a Stupid Act
After David Cameron made a throwaway comment in parliament about the possibility of shutting down social media during a crisis, the internet has been ablaze with back and forth arguments about whether this is a good idea or not.
It’s not.
It’s a naive idea with the potential to cause much more damage than good.
Social media is a powerful communication channel between different people in society. It started in the old tea houses, where people would meet to read and discuss the latest news and opinion pamphlets. It suffered a hiatus with mass media; but social media has brought it back. It allows the free flow of ideas and information to spread quickly. And the net effect of this free flow of information is hugely positive and beneficial for society. The government exists for society’s benefit, and the free flow of information between individuals is what makes them a society. Government has no right to take that away.
It doesn’t take much digging over the past couple of years to see that if people want to communicate, the government can’t do much about it. Repressive regimes do everything they can to block social media channels, but people find a way around them. When people are determined, they will find a way. Even in China (who we should be setting a good example to, not copying), people manage to get around the censors.
So if the government attempted to shut down social media during a national emergency, like the riots, what would happen? Well, one thing is for certain - the rioters would find a way to communicate, and it would have a neglible effect on the riots themselves.
On the other hand, it would be hugely damaging for the rest of society. Social media was an amazing channel during the riots for individuals to share information about what was happening, to find out what travel routes were available, for the media to get on the ground information all over the country as soon as anything happened. It’s an information network the government could never hope to replace. The riots were horrible, but people were relatively calm - because they knew, all the time, what was going on, if their friends were safe. If Facebook and Twitter had been turned off during this time, it would have been chaos. The media wouldn’t know what was going on; they wouldn’t know where riots were happening unless the government told them (unlikely). People wouldn’t know what was happening, where, or when. There would have been more fear, more anger, more confusion.
After the riots, people really pulled together to clean up, with a sense of unity (a lot of this organised over social media). But if the government had shut down one of the most important communication channels for normal people, a lot of the anger that right now has been focused on the rioters would have been deflected on to the government instead.
Before you make your next sweeping statement on controlling how we speak to each other, Mr Cameron, remember: this is our society, and you serve by our grace.
