Like so many others, I woke up to the horrific news of the Mumbai terror attacks last week. The gravity of the situation was made even worse by knowing that my brother was currently in Mumbai. Unable to contact him, I turned to Twitter Search to try and gather any information about what was happening that I could. The stream of information was horrifically compelling, as updates from Mumbai residents and news organistions scrolled down the page, slowly creating a picture of the terrible events that had taken place.
After finally contacting my brother (who was fine), I continued to tune into Twitter for the rest of the day. As the day went on, I began to hear more and more comments from other Twitter users that deeply upset me. Slowly, amongst the updates from people actually in Mumbai and experiencing the event, other’s began posting links to news articles about how Twitter was spreading information faster than traditional media, discussions began about how Twitter was now the New World Order in globabal current events, and basically how awesome we all were for being ahead of the pack. I almost found it unbelievable, but before the killings had even finished in Mumbai, the focus had begun to shift from the event itself to a disgusting display of backslapping and digital high fives. I was like commenting on a news article about a massive car accident with “First”.
Whilst I love Twitter, and use it continually to keep in touch with friends and meet new people, it has a long way to go before it is anything else than a rowdy schoolroom. In fact, I doubt it will ever be anything else, and that is fine because it doesn’t need to be anything else, but the tone certainly gets lowered by people with inflated egos and a deflated sense of empathy who describe events like the Mumbai attacks and the China earthquakes as “triumphs of the information age”. If you ever describe events like that as a triumph, you don’t deserve to have your voice heard.
I can only hope that as these new social tools begin to mature, their users will begin to look at ways they can make a difference rather than just blowing their own horns.
Is it because it is such a relatively new medium, that those using it are more interested in the technology than what it actually does - connect people to communicate?
I guess ‘traditional media’ deal with this situation all the time, but they usually cut it out. Sometimes a little “did you get that?” can be heard. I’m sure the struggle between feeling empathy and actually acting on the one hand and being enthusiastic about a new technology on the other hand is nothing new. It will probably shift towards involvement.
Also, for a lot of people, there’s really nothing they can do. Unless you know Mumbai, or somebody there, or know another way to make yourself useful. Many people are just bystanders. Bystanders with a microphone this time.
I’m pretty sure the situation will mature.
What if more people could make themselves useful? How would that be achieved? Hopefully - once things have cooled down a bit - people will share what they have learned, what tools they used, etc. Others will take notice and learn.
We all hope there won’t be a next time, but of course there will be. Then more people will be be better prepared and more people will be involved. There are a *lot* more good guys than bad guys, so the ability for a large part of the world to instantly focus on an area of trouble is very promising.
But that won’t result in less bystanders anytime soon: it will attract attention from a wider audience, leading to more bystanders. Perhaps this process is already happening, in which case the ‘annoying’ ‘childish’ bystanders are actually good news. They’ll join the ranks.
Sjors