Terrorism - Is social media/the internet making it worse?

mahamageehad

A friendly match between Germany and Netherlands was cancelled and evacuated a few hours ago due to bomb threats. If you were following the whole thing on Twitter you'd have learned that an ambulance filled with explosives was outside the stadium as well as a device inside and another bomb at the train station. BBC and a few others even reported on these claims.

Turns out none of those were actually true though.....

So, without getting into the whole ethics and religion part of the terrorism debate, is social media/the internet making it worse? Or at least making it seem a bigger threat for people than it actually is?

With the latest attacks in Paris, people seem to have lost all perspective on the level of the threat, talking about cancelling trips and closing borders and barricading themselves into the house and stuff. I can't even count how many references to World War 3 I've seen over the last few days!

Before I get accused of it, I'm not saying we shouldn't show support and empathy to the people of France. What happened there was horrible and disgusting and an eye-opener for many in Europe. But even in the worst violence that happened on French soil since WW2, in the worst hit venue (the concert), there was a 94% chance of survival. More people died on Irish roads last year than were killed in Paris but people haven't abandoned their cars in fear. It's the same when an airplane crashes- it freaks a lot of people out and they refuse to fly, despite the fact that they're more likely to be killed driving to the airport!

Tl;dr - Is social media and sensationalist reporting (in conjunction with mé féin attitudes) making the whole terrorism thing seem worse than it is? Or should I be at home quaking in my boots?

jimmycrackcorm

Rte terrified me when I was young reporting news on bombings and shootings in the north. Blame Rte.

The Backwards Man

Social media is the modern equivalent of the man down the pub that knows everything without ever leaving the pub

NIMAN

Totally agree.
Only takes a numpty on the net to start a rumour and it'll be on CNN and the BBC a few minutes later as there is little quality in 24hr rolling news.

the evasion_kid

It's ramping up the fear...

Sh1tbag OToole

NIMAN wrote: »

Totally agree.
Only takes a numpty on the net to start a rumour and it'll be on CNN and the BBC a few minutes later as there is little quality in 24hr rolling news.

Journalism is purely a desk job for many now. It just involves waiting for something interesting to appear on an meaisín tuitóir while drinking endless starbucks and then publish it

mahamageehad

The Backwards Man wrote: »

Social media is the modern equivalent of the man down the pub that knows everything without ever leaving the pub

Yeah except everyone knew to take whatever he said with a pinch (or shovel) of salt whereas people seem to take stuff online as legit. The daily mail and the like are also to blame for that I think.

NIMAN wrote: »

Totally agree.
Only takes a numpty on the net to start a rumour and it'll be on CNN and the BBC a few minutes later as there is little quality in 24hr rolling news.

That's the worrying part... Twitter is still tripping over itself with "BOMBS!!!" despite the fact that German authorities have confirmed nothing was found!

I'd love some kind of verified tag on Twitter or Facebook that marks out the legit stories in the scare mongering and crap.

Junkyard Tom

Humans can't be infected with a computer virus so no.

fleet_admiral

'Good evening and welcome to the 6 one news, here is what we ant you to believe'

mahamageehad

In the news that won't be reported (much if at all), a bomb at roughly the same time killed over 30 in Nigeria.

http://news.yahoo.com/bomb-blast-yola-ne-nigeria-red-cross-resident-211136954.html

nullzero

Something like this was bound to happen so soon after a terrorist attack. It was just a case of where. Terrorism has always made people edgy, that's why it's called terrorism, social media may add another layer of hysteria to it but even without it people would be seeing everything through the lens of terrorist inspired paranoia. In short, social media is an extension of human behavior not really an influencer of it.

sonny.knowles

mahamageehad wrote: »

Yeah except everyone knew to take whatever he said with a pinch (or shovel) of salt whereas people seem to take stuff online as legit. The daily mail and the like are also to blame for that I think.


That's the worrying part... Twitter is still tripping over itself with "BOMBS!!!" despite the fact that German authorities have confirmed nothing was found!

I'd love some kind of verified tag on Twitter or Facebook that marks out the legit stories in the scare mongering and crap.

Verified by who though? Twitter or Facebook? A government spokesperson or legitimate news provider? An 'eye witness'?

sonny.knowles

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Humans can't be infected with a computer virus so no.

That's what the computers want you to believe. Next they'll be saying that computers can't take a dump.

Harry Palmr

Ignore everything until its confirmed and even then wait for the second source.

The relentless nature of the modern media tsunami means there is plenty of time to keep making the same handful of points over and over and over again. Its like being punched around the ring after a while.

People who do not spend all day soaking it up are probably a bit happier and less paranoid.

RDM_83 again

nullzero wrote: »

Something like this was bound to happen so soon after a terrorist attack. It was just a case of where. Terrorism has always made people edgy, that's why it's called terrorism, social media may add another layer of hysteria to it but even without it people would be seeing everything through the lens of terrorist inspired paranoia. In short, social media is an extension of human behavior not really an influencer of it.

I would say its also to do with the fact for the Irish/British generally we have experience with a different sort of "Terrorism".
The entire IRA bombing campaign in mainland Britain killed 180 people and there was a lot of attacks over decades, a bomb scare would in general not involve a device that was going to cause casualties.
Yes there was far too many dead deliberately and accidental atrocities like Omagh but even myself having mainly grown up post 94 and spent most of my adult life in the Republic , I've seen the aftermath of at least 3 bombs, one of which was large, and been driven past (before it was discovered) a viable (but not armed) dissident car bomb.
Even stuff relating to the middle east has changed, there was plenty of hijackings that ended peacefully back in the 70's etc

timthumbni

nullzero wrote: »

Something like this was bound to happen so soon after a terrorist attack. It was just a case of where. Terrorism has always made people edgy, that's why it's called terrorism, social media may add another layer of hysteria to it but even without it people would be seeing everything through the lens of terrorist inspired paranoia. In short, social media is an extension of human behavior not really an influencer of it.

Very good post. I was brought up in Northern Ireland. Random bombs, shootings could leave anyone on edge. Social media has made things much more fluid now of course but that's the way things are. Social media can sometimes also calm situations quicker compared to my day too.

It's easy from a distance sometimes to suggest some people are acting irrationally. Perhaps in fact those people are acting very rationally. I was in situations during the Northern Ireland troubles that most people from the rest of the UK or the Republic would consider completely out of their comfort zone. My school was right beside an ruc station that the ira were constantly attacking or leaving hoax bombs. That's what terrorism is.

222233

i think the media is definitely making in worse in terms of fear however I also think that given the circumstances it is appropriate. I empathise with everyone who dies at the feet of radical terrorists but I must say that when this kind of thing hits the West it certainly makes it more real and hard to not think about.

Samaris

Bah, I really wish the news wouldn't take freaking -Twitter- as a source!

Journalism, we mourn your loss.

The_Valeyard

sonny.knowles wrote: »

That's what the computers want you to believe. Next they'll be saying that computers can't take a dump.

Yep. They defo do that. Blue Screen Of Death.

The Randy Riverbeast

Theres a race to have the latest news first, not taking the time to wait for something to be confirmed. Have a twitter account or a youtube video where you talk about the truth "they" don't want you to know about and you'll have the idiots lapping it up.

Think it's in the US where you're more likely to get hit by lightning than die in a terrorist attack.

XR3i

mahamageehad wrote: »

A friendly match between Germany and Netherlands was cancelled and evacuated a few hours ago due to bomb threats. If you were following the whole thing on Twitter you'd have learned that an ambulance filled with explosives was outside the stadium as well as a device inside and another bomb at the train station. BBC and a few others even reported on these claims.

Turns out none of those were actually true though.....

So, without getting into the whole ethics and religion part of the terrorism debate, is social media/the internet making it worse? Or at least making it seem a bigger threat for people than it actually is?

With the latest attacks in Paris, people seem to have lost all perspective on the level of the threat, talking about cancelling trips and closing borders and barricading themselves into the house and stuff. I can't even count how many references to World War 3 I've seen over the last few days!

Before I get accused of it, I'm not saying we shouldn't show support and empathy to the people of France. What happened there was horrible and disgusting and an eye-opener for many in Europe. But even in the worst violence that happened on French soil since WW2, in the worst hit venue (the concert), there was a 94% chance of survival. More people died on Irish roads last year than were killed in Paris but people haven't abandoned their cars in fear. It's the same when an airplane crashes- it freaks a lot of people out and they refuse to fly, despite the fact that they're more likely to be killed driving to the airport!

Tl;dr - Is social media and sensationalist reporting (in conjunction with mé féin attitudes) making the whole terrorism thing seem worse than it is? Or should I be at home quaking in my boots?

have u any skin in the game yourself,

it's easy to be philosophical if u haven't

petrolcan

Long gone are the times when you had to leave the house, find a phone box (and 20p) to create a bomb scare. Now a tweet will suffice.

nullzero

RDM_83 again wrote: »

I would say its also to do with the fact for the Irish/British generally we have experience with a different sort of "Terrorism".
The entire IRA bombing campaign in mainland Britain killed 180 people and there was a lot of attacks over decades, a bomb scare would in general not involve a device that was going to cause casualties.
Yes there was far too many dead deliberately and accidental atrocities like Omagh but even myself having mainly grown up post 94 and spent most of my adult life in the Republic , I've seen the aftermath of at least 3 bombs, one of which was large, and been driven past (before it was discovered) a viable (but not armed) dissident car bomb.
Even stuff relating to the middle east has changed, there was plenty of hijackings that ended peacefully back in the 70's etc

In relation to your last point, the big difference between IS and previous Islamic terrorist groups is the ideological difference. IS ate recognized as being an apocalypse cult, they believe the world is going to end with a few decades and they are responsible for having a worldwide caliphate in place before that happens.

endacl

mahamageehad wrote: »

the whole terrorism thing

The bit in bold. It makes my teeth itch. Can we grow out of it soon please?

The whole *insert topic* thing. Unless you refer specifically to an aspect of the subject under discussion, a discussion of the totality of the subject is implied.

Nothing to do with the thread. It's just that it makes people sound stupid. When everybody sounds stupid its harder to spot the actual stupid people. It appears to be the new 'literally'.

Cease. Also desist.

keithclancy

The new trend on Facebook is people shaming people for saying anything about the Paris Attacks as they should be sorry for all things that happen everywhere at all times..


E.G.

Person A: Feel sorry for the people dead in the Bataclan
Person B: You are a c*nt .. what about people that died in Beirut, you disgust me.

Social Media be crazy

Azalea

XR3i wrote: »

have u any skin in the game yourself,

it's easy to be philosophical if u haven't

Where's the being philosophical?

I would think so definitely OP - social media makes it a lot easier to fearmonger than before social media.

Corpus Twisty

Is it not doing the rounds that Anonymous hacked the paris network and gave the terrorists details to the Gendarmerie? Also fecked up a lot of their Twitter/vid feeds??

Wouldn't be 100% on that, but I was told so this evening. If true, or even a bit true - there's the internet making it better.

The Randy Riverbeast

Corpus Twisty wrote: »

Is it not doing the rounds that Anonymous hacked the paris network and gave the terrorists details to the Gendarmerie? Also fecked up a lot of their Twitter/vid feeds??

Wouldn't be 100% on that, but I was told so this evening. If true, or even a bit true - there's the internet making it better.

The 72 virgins strike back.

gormdubhgorm

endacl wrote: »

The bit in bold. It makes my teeth itch. Can we grow out of it soon please?

The whole *insert topic* thing. Unless you refer specifically to an aspect of the subject under discussion, a discussion of the totality of the subject is implied.

Nothing to do with the thread. It's just that it makes people sound stupid. When everybody sounds stupid its harder to spot the actual stupid people. It appears to be the new 'literally'.

Cease. Also desist.

I think "thing" is an Americanism blame Nickoldeoan!

TheLastMohican

"Small earthquake in Southern Peru ......... no injuries/damage", doesn't grab peoples' imagination.

gormdubhgorm

keithclancy wrote: »

The new trend on Facebook is people shaming people for saying anything about the Paris Attacks as they should be sorry for all things that happen everywhere at all times..


E.G.

Person A: Feel sorry for the people dead in the Bataclan
Person B: You are a c*nt .. what about people that died in Beirut, you disgust me.

Social Media be crazy

In fairness I think the point the person's B's are making are valid ones. People ignore the non-trendy atrocities Africa/Asia/Russia v Chechnya etc. I suppose in fairness to person A they are only reacting to what happens in the mainstream media. Is person B a hipster in this regard? I don't know.
But if your going to start changing your profile pic to the French flag - on the basis of equality you should be putting up flags of countries each week for the latest one!

I think the Internet is making terrorism worse because on the basis of the social conformity bias, people are being coerced into what to think by the majority.

NachoBusiness

They shouldn't allow people to hear the real voices of ISIS.

They should dub their voices with the voices of actors.

That's the only way to defeat terrorists.

DEFTLEFTHAND

A terrible worrying thing is to go on European Islamic message boards and see people agreeing with these assaults. The enemy lives amongst us.

Overheal

"Why do they hate us?"

Ask a progressive, "Because we constantly interfere in their regional affairs, selling bombs to people that drop them on other people, killing kids with a made-in-USA explosive."

Ask a conservative, "They hate our way of life, our folk music, our television, our freedom, etc."

Eh, which one makes a lot more sense? eg. how many terror threats have been placed on Ireland from the Middle East, and precisely just how much does Ireland interfere with the Middle East? If they were pissed off about the fast food they would have bombed a Supermacs years ago.

keithclancy

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

In fairness I think the point the person's B's are making are valid ones. People ignore the non-trendy atrocities Africa/Asia/Russia v Chechnya etc. I suppose in fairness to person A they are only reacting to what happens in the mainstream media. Is person B a hipster in this regard? I don't know.
But if your going to start changing your profile pic to the French flag - on the basis of equality you should be putting up flags of countries each week for the latest one!

I think the Internet is making terrorism worse because on the basis of the social conformity bias, people are being coerced into what to think by the majority.

I think it's more about people making assumptions, e.g. the French flag on peoples profiles many people did this as a 'Please don't bomb the sh*t out of Syria for this'

The other people you mention I think it's merely whats close to home, the Paris bombings weren't big news in China, India, Japan, Indonesia or the Philippines for example, that's almost half the world population wise.

News is about what people will watch, for example this Irish woman that was killed in Den Bosch in the Netherlands was all over the Irish News but wasn't mentioned anywhere on the Dutch news.

It was news because she was Irish, it didn't matter where the event occurred.

Sort of like people that didn't know somebody don't go to their Funeral.

Ireland would have many more ties and more Irish people would visit Paris or have relatives/friends living there than they would in Beirut for example.

nullzero

Overheal wrote: »

"Why do they hate us?"

Ask a progressive, "Because we constantly interfere in their regional affairs, selling bombs to people that drop them on other people, killing kids with a made-in-USA explosive."

Ask a conservative, "They hate our way of life, our folk music, our television, our freedom, etc."

Eh, which one makes a lot more sense? eg. how many terror threats have been placed on Ireland from the Middle East, and precisely just how much does Ireland interfere with the Middle East? If they were pissed off about the fast food they would have bombed a Supermacs years ago.

The current crowd are different to the Islamic terrorists of the past. ISIS adhere to the idea set out in the Koran that Islam will take over the entire world be it by assimilation or force, regardless of any particular countries political status, every country is fair game for them and their warped tactics. While I can understand the point you are making you are applying existing logic to a completely new situation. These people are a new breed entirely and while western foreign policy may have played a part in these people's radicalisation it is not their sole motivation, that married to the fact that a lot of these people are not necessarily coming from countries or regions that have had any conflicts occur in recent memory makes ISIS a more worrying proposition than previous Islamic terror groups.

StewartGriffin

I've been wearing a PLO scarf for the last five years and last night I accidentally clicked on a link on Facebook that took me to a NEWS site and I found out that Palestinians are actually proper MUSLIMS! :eek: Like OMFG!
So, what do I do? Do I take off the scarf and get "unliked" by my "Freedom for Palestine" buddies, or do I leave it on and get awkward questions from the kids in school, (I'm a geography teacher,) about supporting Islam?

Worried and confused.

It hasn't make it worse exactly it has just given terrorism more opportunities, On the news one of the organisers form Belgium was described as as a paranoid weed smoking malcontent who ownes a run down bar.

Before the internet his chances of joining up with more other malcontents would have been much more limited, now at the click of a button he is in touch with militants in Syria and organising bomb attracts.

sonny.knowles

StewartGriffin wrote: »

I've been wearing a PLO scarf for the last five years and last night I accidentally clicked on a link on Facebook that took me to a NEWS site and I found out that Palestinians are actually proper MUSLIMS! :eek: Like OMFG!
So, what do I do? Do I take off the scarf and get "unliked" by my "Freedom for Palestine" buddies, or do I leave it on and get awkward questions from the kids in school, (I'm a geography teacher,) about supporting Islam?

Worried and confused.

Or option c - burn the scarf.

keithclancy

StewartGriffin wrote: »

I've been wearing a PLO scarf for the last five years and last night I accidentally clicked on a link on Facebook that took me to a NEWS site and I found out that Palestinians are actually proper MUSLIMS! :eek: Like OMFG!
So, what do I do? Do I take off the scarf and get "unliked" by my "Freedom for Palestine" buddies, or do I leave it on and get awkward questions from the kids in school, (I'm a geography teacher,) about supporting Islam?

Worried and confused.

How about you keep your symbolism and personal ideas at the door, not everyone in the school might be ok with your ideas.

Some other teacher might be Jewish and it could cause problems.

StewartGriffin

keithclancy wrote: »

Some other teacher might be Jewish and it could cause problems.

No, it's ok. It's a Catholic school.

keithclancy

StewartGriffin wrote: »

No, it's ok. It's a Catholic school.

Ah yes, I forgot, Ireland were you can only teach people if you join the Catholic Club.

Do you think it's your job to teach children that aren't your own, political ideas ?

Or is your job to teach them Geography ?

ScumLord

Social media reminds me of that story from the bible where that Jesus fella was condemned by the unthinking mob out for blood. If that scene happened today Pontius Pilate would have been condemned as a Jesus supporter and crucified alongside Jesus before he could even say hello to the crowd.


Facebook is the largest mob in human history. It has all the undesirable qualities of a mob and some new ones thrown in for good measure. People posting on facebook may think they're being smart or proactive, but they basically become the digital equivalent of a screaming lunatic at the back of a crowd of generally angry people.

Corpus Twisty

Corpus Twisty wrote: »

Is it not doing the rounds that Anonymous hacked the paris network and gave the terrorists details to the Gendarmerie? Also fecked up a lot of their Twitter/vid feeds??

Wouldn't be 100% on that, but I was told so this evening. If true, or even a bit true - there's the internet making it better.

The Randy Riverbeast wrote: »

The 72 virgins strike back.

They have successfully taken down around 5,000 (at last count, it might be more now) Twitter accounts associated with Daesh (because f*ck calling them IS) alone. Now .. assuming that even a minority of those were stupid enough not to cover their ass with VPNs and the like, then that means that the authorities now have the details of many sympathisers.

Also the recent Anonymous attacks have forced Daesh to inform their users on how to better protect themselves online.

On topic - no, Social media/the internet isn't making terrorism worse. Sure, it might make it easier to get their propaganda across, but that's about it. It's actually been proven recently that they weren't even using encrypted texting to organize the attacks.

ScumLord

Deleted User wrote: »

On topic - no, Social media/the internet isn't making terrorism worse.

The whole point of terrorism is to terrorize. I think many facebook users are terror addicts, they seek it out of facebook and promote the most terrifying posts they can find. Facebook has made terrorism much more effective.

ScumLord

ScumLord wrote: »

The whole point of terrorism is to terrorize. I think many facebook users are terror addicts, they seek it out of facebook and promote the most terrifying posts they can find. Facebook has made terrorism much more effective.

I don't really agree as such. If anything, what's made terrorism more effective is 24 Hour news networks, who discuss nothing but the attacks for days on end, nonstop.

ScumLord

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't really agree as such. If anything, what's made terrorism more effective is 24 Hour news networks, who discuss nothing but the attacks for days on end, nonstop.

Ya, I saw sky news is on youtube now so I stuck it on for a while. I don't know how their allowed to broadcast, it's blatant scaremongering. It really was like watching the people who write the scripts for low budget action flicks talk about world affairs.

But at least there's some relation to the real world and the truth. Facebook will promote out and out lies to push an agenda. People can wallow in their fears and end up with absolutely bizarre points of view.

StewartGriffin

keithclancy wrote: »

Ah yes, I forgot, Ireland were you can only teach people if you join the Catholic Club.

Don't have one. We have Rugby, Athletics and Debating. We're a fairly small school.

Do you think it's your job to teach children that aren't your own, political ideas ?

No, of course not. That's the CSPE and SPHE teachers job.

Or is your job to teach them Geography ?

Yes, I do Geography, and sometimes take the Religion class.

What's all this got to do with my Dilemma?

keithclancy

StewartGriffin wrote: »

Yes, I do Geography, and sometimes take the Religion class.

What's all this got to do with my Dilemma?

Sure ... then I guess it's fine to wear a jumper with the Union Jack on it .. or a jumper with a picture of Ian Paisley on it in your workplace.

An Irish Catholic Geography/Part Time religion teacher wearing a Kefiyeh while teaching children just looks strange.

In the end the only reason you wear it is as a political statement.

That shouldn't be in school at all.

Not saying I do not share your point of view, but I would never push my personal ideas onto children, that's up to their parents and just plain wrong.

With a captive audience, positive propaganda is as bad as Negative propaganda.

StewartGriffin

keithclancy wrote: »

Sure ... then I guess it's fine to wear a jumper with the Union Jack on it .. or a jumper with a picture of Ian Paisley on it in your workplace.

An Irish Catholic Geography/Part Time religion teacher wearing a Kefiyeh while teaching children just looks strange.

In the end the only reason you wear it is as a political statement.

That shouldn't be in school at all.

Not saying I do not share your point of view, but I would never push my personal ideas onto children, that's up to their parents and just plain wrong.

With a captive audience, positive propaganda is as bad as Negative propaganda.

What the heck's a Kafiyeh? My PLO scarf has little smiley Yasser Arafat faces all over it.

Corpus Twisty

StewartGriffin wrote: »

I've been wearing a PLO scarf for the last five years and last night I accidentally clicked on a link on Facebook that took me to a NEWS site and I found out that Palestinians are actually proper MUSLIMS! :eek: Like OMFG!
So, what do I do? Do I take off the scarf and get "unliked" by my "Freedom for Palestine" buddies, or do I leave it on and get awkward questions from the kids in school, (I'm a geography teacher,) about supporting Islam?

Worried and confused.

Lol. Way to be informed about a cause.. gonna wreck your head if you ever read up about Che Guevara.