This NP front page piece today on Camille Cacnio's "apology" quotes UBC sociology professor Christopher Schneider saying about Cacnio's online outers and related backlash: “vigilante justice in cyberspace…. It is a very dangerous path we’re taking. It is quite unsettling. ..."
Does anyone seriously think that Prof. Schneider's hypothetical "dangerous path" is in any way equivalent to the path that actually led a real mob of privileged, pampered, narcissistic middle class rioters to cause millions of dollars of destruction to the Vancouver city centre and injure scores of people? Please!
Arguably, it's soft-headed "thinking" like the professor's that has influenced parenting, schooling and the justice system to the point where those rioters thought they could get away with mayhem and suffer no serious consequences. I suspect they (the rioters) are not far wrong.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
"A dangerous path we're going down"? WTF
As dangerous as alchol fueled rich kids burning 17 cars, beating anyone who tried to stop them and looting buisnesses?
While the police were left deliberately understaffed unable to contain the mob.
The Mayor, police Chief, city Manager need firing.
TangoJuliette sez:
So . . . "crimestopper"-type, anonymously phoned-in tips re.: crimes witnessed, are roundly solicited, on air, and in print.
Video-witnessing/recording of criminal acts? Not so much, eh?
Tipster-rewards sometimes offered in first instance, a cacophony of calumny in the latter.
ttfn,
tj
t. e. & o. e.
Right on, Bubba.
Oh, I forgot say in the post:
Kudos to the National Post for joining the "cybermob" by posting the original full text of Cacnio's "apology".
All of these comments about the potential danger of the "cyber mob" by our betters (media pundits, university professors, etc.) are the typical lefty response to any sort of outrage.
Do you recall all the "backlash against Muslims" bs that the media droned on about after 9/11? And how many were attacked?
The response of the left is to feign outrage at the potential for violence, or discrimination (that somehow never materializes) as opposed to actually dealing with violence that did occur.
The "cyber mob" is no mob at all. The fact that so many commentators are finding equivalence between the real mob and the people writing angry comments online is indicative of both their collective blindness and their reliance on media cliches.
The same people that are now finding a mob mentality run rampant online are the same people that couldn't see it in the drunken hordes that congregated downtown throughout the playoffs, the same people that suggested boarding up businesses downtown prior to game seven was a provocation (CTV), the same people that insisted we'd learned out lessons from '94, the same people that blissfully repeated every falsehood that attempted to frame the event: the riot was a small group of anarchists, adequate police forces were on the streets, etc.
The "cyber mob" is a reaction, not just to the rioters and the destruction they caused, but also to the lies our elected officials and media spoon-feed us. Individuals, not a mob, are outing people online, writing letters, and attempting to effect change. That's not a mob --that's the essence of democracy.
"... the essence of democracy."
That's right. Via the web, people now have a way of directly expressing their outrage at the gratuitous mob violence and frustration with police, politicians and others - unfiltered by the media.
Post a Comment