Regulation of Social Networking Part III

So, you might remember a few weeks ago I did a post about the regulation of social networking. No? Were you too busy to read it? Were you not arsed about reading it? Were you too scared to read it? Well in case you missed it it is here - (http://stegzy.livejournal.com/818818.html). If you never read another of my posts, please make sure you read this one.

 

Anyway, the past two weeks have been very interesting. Little stories tucked away here and there with one that I almost missed. But first, let me take you back to the letters page of the Daily Mirror of last Monday. Recently a girl, was found dead after going to meet someone she had met through Facebook. This someone curiously was a homeless someone which begs the question where did he get computer access from. But that aside, the police think he did it...wait...no...the PRESS want us to think he did it because he was arrested because of it. See how I'm falling into this trap too. He has not been to court over this yet and few details have been released, but the automatic assumption is that HE did it. But that aside, the method of how HE allegedly did it, was by luring an innocent teenager (who incidently was 17) to her death through Facebook. At first I was like "meh, another one" but this time I thought no, I'll look at this a bit closer. Now, one of the ways governments like to get over an unpopular motion is to make it seem that their unpopular notion is actually popular. They do this by quoting opinion polls and surveys which back their stance (think Iraq War II and any number of other recent unpopular events) or by refering to what "people in their constituency" have said to them (like Jack Straw constantly says) or by manipulating the media to whip up a frenzy or moral panic. So when I looked a bit deeper, I discovered this nice little letters page -

Daily Mirror 02-11-2009

Clicky for biggy Ok, so if you're too lazy to look at that, I'll tell you what it says here. Basically it is a page of letters, unbalanced, calling for tighter regulation of, or the abolition of, social networking sites like Facebook. The people that wrote those letters are clearly unbalanced individuals and I don't mean in a political standpoint I mean mad and possibly without the mental capacity to actually contemplate their own arguement. The type of people that only vote a particular political party because that's what their parents voted for. Automatons. But wait, maybe there is the slight possibility that.....THEY DON'T EXIST and that the letters are just constructs of agenda setters bent on making the idea of a regulated internet and social networking sphere a socially acceptable one....Surely not.....but it is a possibility..... So I was going to not bother posting that. Until earlier today when I came across this nice little gem which I think you should all read.....

 UK surveillance plan to go ahead - BBC News Website [Accessed 10/11/09]

Again, if you can't be bothered to read or follow the link, it is an article announcing the Home Offices intention to require all internet habits to be monitored. Of course, it is facing some opposition but, now you'll love this bit, I bet you this....over the next few months we'll hear more about criminals meeting through social networking sites, more about people getting murdered by meeting people off the internet and I would even wager that one "victim" will end up being a child....a beautiful middle class child.........Moral panics...gotta love them...

 

Anyway, if you can't be arsed to read this, the articles or anything else, why not be equally unarsed to watch this little film. It is the most interesting two hours I've spent in a while.....