Rioting In The UK Sundays

[Reiner Torheit]

Press prurience reaches a frenzy this weekend as even long-forgotten hacks find they can use the riots as a chance to talk tosh.

The Wail On Sunday "Why oh why oh why oh why oh why?" asks columnist Wye O'Wye.

The Observer "See, I told you there wouldn't be any silly riots!" writes Nicko Cohen

The Observer Colour Supplement "This would never have happened if David Miliband was PM" - Polly Parrot.

The Sunday Times "The Lights Are Going Out All Over Europe" - From Our Correspondent.

The Dependent On Sunday "Al Fresco Eating - 10 Recipes You Can Broil In Foil Over Burned-Out Vehicles" - by Phaedra Famous-Daddy

The Dependent On Sunday Supplement "I say it once again, Tony Blair cannot be held responsible for this" by John Rentaghoul

The Sunday Torygraph "Blistering Blue Bashi-Bazouks! Ten Thousand Troglodytic Typhoons!" - by special correspondent Simon Heffer

The Scotsman "Policeman helps little old lady across Sauchiehall Street" - by our correspondent.

The Evening Argus "Tofu Parade Stops Traffic in Bond Street"

[John W]

Press prurience reaches a frenzy this weekend as even long-forgotten hacks find they can use the riots as a chance to talk tosh.

Oh Reiner, I think you are the one talking tosh. Hundreds of people have been made homeles by these riots.

[Reiner Torheit]

Thank you for the helpful advice, John.

When are you going to apologise for claiming that Police were correct in kicking Ian Tomlinson to death, by the way?

[John W]

I will report your posting to the moderators, I have made no such claim.

And your posting just shows how ill-informed you are Reiner. Ian Tomlinson was not kicked to death, he was beaten by a truncheon. And the copper has been charged with manslaughter.

[perfect wagnerite]

Cameron's comments about Twitter really are beyond stupidity (and I note the commitment was to look at social networking - leading me to suggest that when the time comes nothing will be done).

Leaving aside the fact that banning the medium of communication is a ludicrous response to a situation (nothing made Thatcher look so foolish as the "oxygen of publicity" ban on Sinn Fein, even if it did provide employment for a number of Gerry Adams sound-alikes):

i) It would probably need primary legislation to do it - it's not at all obvious that the Government has the powers

ii) It is quite likely to be contrary to the European Convention on Human Rights, which protects the right to correspondence (of which, lawyers would argue, Twitter is no more than an electronic form)

iii) Quite a lot of police forces use Twitter to get messages out to the public - including messages about where disturbances were taking place in the last few days (and more significantly where disturbances were not taking place, in order to quash rumours - for example, followers to the Sussex Police twitter feed were informed that rumours of disturbances in Brighton's London Road on Tuesday were not true.  Since I was standing at a bus stop in the London Road at the time I knew this already, but it was reassuring)

iv) Twitter is a business whose revenue model is based on levels of activity (it gets a cut when people post to it using their phones).  Is the Government going to compensate Twitter when it is switched off? 

It's a classic example of a political establishment more interested in the Daily Mail line than the truth.  It's just one example IMO of Cameron's poor performance in the last week - a weak man using big words to try to look strong, without bothering to find out whether those words make any sense.  It's also I think an example of something I've been thinking for some time - that the Coalition just isn't very good at Government.

[Reiner Torheit]

Have a lovely weekend, John.

[John W]

Have a lovely weekend, John.

That's a rather childish response after a libellous one 

[Reiner Torheit]

Have a lovely weekend with bells on, John.

[John W]

It's certainly knee-jerk comments regarding closing down Twitter, Facebook. Blackberry whatever when there is disorder. And of course the problem is such action disrupts other people's communications.

There are comparisons to be made though, for example a road or highway can be closed during a disturbance, so nobody can use that road.

Are there other comparisons?

Offenders can be restricted by banning driving, paedos can be restricted by banning internet access, stalkers can be banned from entering certain areas, so could looters/fire-raisers be banned from owning or using a mobile phone? Difficult to enforce I suppose.

[oliver sudden]

I had been under the (possibly mistaken) impression that those who were organising looting-type activities were mainly using Blackberry to do so. Twitter is far too public - you'd be a complete fool to use it for such a purpose. (The point has been made on Twitter in the last couple of days: why would you stop people using it when it makes them so easy to trace?)

On the other hand Twitter has certainly been very useful not only to the police laying rumours to rest (admittedly many of those rumours were Twitter-based...) but also to the various community clean-up efforts. To me the only apt comparison with cracking down on Twitter and the like would be cracking down on the use of phones. Would you really turn everyone's phone off in a disturbance just because the 'baddies' were using them? Downright dangerous.

[John W]

Yes ollie the 'shutdown' suggestions are not useful.

Even the banning of using a phone is difficult to enforce, just as driving bans are ignored by criminals intent on travelling to a place to commit a crime, and the banning of carrying a gun or a knife are ignored by criminals intent on using threatening behaviour.

[chivhu]

 It's also I think an example of something I've been thinking for some time - that the Coalition just isn't very good at Government.
[/quote]

What this kakocratic government needs rather urgently is a Minister for Common Sense that will advise his or her colleagues to avoid introducing counter-intuitive policies - e.g. raising higher education fees to £9000 will deter many from going to University and cutting local government funding will undermine attempts to create the Big Society.  I could go on with examples. 

[John W]

raising higher education fees to £9000 will deter many from going to University

That, of course, is the intention, isn't it? 

and cutting local government funding will undermine attempts to create the Big Society.

Will undermine the creation of what YOU think a Big Society might be, but what, I wonder, is Cameron's real vison?

[chivhu]

John W, As is my frequent tendency, I was being ironic.  A kakocracy ipso facto will not recognise the innate failings of their proclaimed policy - that's why it's a kakocracy

[AZomby]

... but what, I wonder, is Cameron's real vision?

Umm? I wonder? CoCo is certainly 'not for turning spending'.
Every time he puts his hand in his pocket his bow tie spins round ...