5 ms·

I'm not sure what we're supposed to take away from this. BBM is the weapon of choice for the modern rioter? I confess I've never used the software - does it inc

I'm not sure what we're supposed to take away from this. BBM is the weapon of choice for the modern rioter? I confess I've never used the software - does it include special features to incite rioting? Neither Blackberry, Twitter, nor Facebook fuelled the fire under London's riots, any more than the internet, radio waves, or electricity did. Violent, hateful people did that.

corin_ 15y ago
What I took away from this article wasn't that BBM should be blamed (or, I guess, credited, depending on your point of view) for the riot, which is how some people seem to have read it. For me it was basically a puff piece reminding us that, just because RIM has big problems, it doesn't mean their devices (and software on them) aren't popular. It just so happened that a big news story could be used to make that point, which is what gave the story enough traction to be worth writing at all.
jlangenauer 15y ago
Actually, if we drop the Victorian mindset that people are innately criminals, we might look to the social and economic causes - massive unemployment amongst black youth, closure of youth services, almost complete political disenfranchisement - for something of an explanation of the riots.
- ig1 15y ago
  I think "we want free stuff" is a pretty good explanation for the vast majority of the looting, and "smashing stuff is fun" for the destruction. There are plenty of places with high-unemployment, political disenfranchisement, etc. which haven't turned to rioting. While it may have been a contributing cause (if you've got less to risk you might be more willing to get involved in looting, etc.) to say it was the primary reason is insulting to the million of law-abiding individuals from struggling economic and social backgrounds.
  - nodata 15y ago
    Your answer is a diversion. You changed the reason to "these people want free stuff". That doesn't help. Why aren't YOU looting and rioting and "wanting free stuff"? We're back to the same question again. Why these people? Why this group?
    - gaius 15y ago
      This is a "deprived" area of London, but the question is, what are they being deprived of? What is it that they had before, that has been taken away? What do other parts of London have that they do not? If you want an answer, it's that successive governments gave them free stuff, everything from their housing up, and now they can't really tell the difference between stuff you just get and stuff you're free to take anymore.
      - nodata 15y ago
        You don't need to have lost something to be deprived. You can be deprived of chances that others have.
        gaius 15y ago
        Which are what exactly? Unless I'm mistaken the people of Tottenham get free educations to the age of 18 same as everyone else in the UK. They also have as good a public transport infrastructure as anywhere else and can work anywhere in London.
        nodata 15y ago
        Well that's what we're trying to find the answer to: what's different about this group of people?
        gaius 15y ago
        And I told you. They've been given so much they can't now see why they can't just take anything they want. Seriously, you don't fight for freedom/education/"a chance" by nicking a 50" plasma TV. And doing so is an insult to people like, for example, the Libyans and Egyptians who really did - and do - fight for something worthwhile.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- mseebach 15y ago
  So what's the mindset called where any behaviour, no matter how egoistical and anti-social, is excused and blamed on something else (often a government entity is implied)? And when can we drop that? I'm not saying that being jobless in this economy and being politically disenfranchised is exactly a recipe for success, but where do we draw the line between criminal behaviour and legitimate grievances. There are a lot of people with undesirable job situations who feel politically disenfranchised, but who somehow manage to live inside the law. I wonder what will happen to their feeling of disenfranchisement if looters are given a pass?

corin_ 15y ago

What I took away from this article wasn't that BBM should be blamed (or, I guess, credited, depending on your point of view) for the riot, which is how some people seem to have read it. For me it was basically a puff piece reminding us that, just because RIM has big problems, it doesn't mean their devices (and software on them) aren't popular. It just so happened that a big news story could be used to make that point, which is what gave the story enough traction to be worth writing at all.

jlangenauer 15y ago

Actually, if we drop the Victorian mindset that people are innately criminals, we might look to the social and economic causes - massive unemployment amongst black youth, closure of youth services, almost complete political disenfranchisement - for something of an explanation of the riots.

ig1 15y ago
I think "we want free stuff" is a pretty good explanation for the vast majority of the looting, and "smashing stuff is fun" for the destruction. There are plenty of places with high-unemployment, political disenfranchisement, etc. which haven't turned to rioting. While it may have been a contributing cause (if you've got less to risk you might be more willing to get involved in looting, etc.) to say it was the primary reason is insulting to the million of law-abiding individuals from struggling economic and social backgrounds.
- nodata 15y ago
  Your answer is a diversion. You changed the reason to "these people want free stuff". That doesn't help. Why aren't YOU looting and rioting and "wanting free stuff"? We're back to the same question again. Why these people? Why this group?
  - gaius 15y ago
    This is a "deprived" area of London, but the question is, what are they being deprived of? What is it that they had before, that has been taken away? What do other parts of London have that they do not? If you want an answer, it's that successive governments gave them free stuff, everything from their housing up, and now they can't really tell the difference between stuff you just get and stuff you're free to take anymore.
    - nodata 15y ago
      You don't need to have lost something to be deprived. You can be deprived of chances that others have.
      - gaius 15y ago
        Which are what exactly? Unless I'm mistaken the people of Tottenham get free educations to the age of 18 same as everyone else in the UK. They also have as good a public transport infrastructure as anywhere else and can work anywhere in London.
        nodata 15y ago
        Well that's what we're trying to find the answer to: what's different about this group of people?
        gaius 15y ago
        And I told you. They've been given so much they can't now see why they can't just take anything they want. Seriously, you don't fight for freedom/education/"a chance" by nicking a 50" plasma TV. And doing so is an insult to people like, for example, the Libyans and Egyptians who really did - and do - fight for something worthwhile.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
mseebach 15y ago
So what's the mindset called where any behaviour, no matter how egoistical and anti-social, is excused and blamed on something else (often a government entity is implied)? And when can we drop that? I'm not saying that being jobless in this economy and being politically disenfranchised is exactly a recipe for success, but where do we draw the line between criminal behaviour and legitimate grievances. There are a lot of people with undesirable job situations who feel politically disenfranchised, but who somehow manage to live inside the law. I wonder what will happen to their feeling of disenfranchisement if looters are given a pass?