Hey Reddit, Enough Boston Bombing Vigilantism

[cali]

If there's one thing we want to believe about the Boston bombing, it's that someone saw the perpetrator. Somewhere, inside an iPhone or on a memory chip, there's an image of the terrorist(s). The video would serve as evidence at a trial, and it would calm the queasy feeling that grows as the hours pass between tragedy and arrest. Someone can't just plant bombs among hundreds of people and walk away without being spotted. Not in today's surveillance/sousveillance society. Right?

So, vigilantes have organized themselves on Reddit for a manhunt. They want justice served. And they're openly debating suspects on the site. They're gonna solve the case! Like real cops on television.

But they are not real cops. They are well-meaning people who have not considered the moral weight of what they're doing.* This is vigilantism, and it's only the illusion that what we do online is not as significant as what we do offline that allows this to go on. Imagine if people were standing around in Boston pointing fingers at people in photographs and (roughly) accusing them of terrorism.

In one case, they point out a man in a "blue robe" and how he's holding his backpack. "Also note that in the very far right pic, he is clutching his hand with a very tight grip as if the backpack is really heavy," one says. "That left hand is holding quite a lot of tension. The guy is trying to look nonchalant, maybe?" another replies. "Though, look at the angle of the shoulder straps. You would expect them to be pointing straight down if they were under the weight of 30-40lbs, not angled like that"

Guys, this isn't dissecting the quality of an animation on the PS3: this is a human being whose role in an act of terrorism is being debated in a public forum because of people's observations of the "tension" in his grip on his bag?

<snip>
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/04/hey-reddit-enough-boston-bombing-vigilantism/275062/

[MrBig]

1. Its easy to play keyboard detective

Unfortunately, once they set their sights on someone, that person, innocent or not, will have their lives completely ruined.

[limpyhobbler]

2. If they actually started trying to arrest people that would be vigilantism.

Looking at these pictures and trying to piece together what happened, it's not the same as being a vigilante. A vigilante is a private person who tries to enforce laws in place of a cop, or maybe to enforce justice as they see it. Looking for clues or suspicious stuff in internet pictures of the Boston thing, I don't really think it crosses the line of what's indecent. Possibly it's a stupid idea and/or a huge waste of time.

On the other hand I do see both sides of this question. The author of this makes some good points.

I don't think he helps his cause by calling it vigilantism because it seems like an exaggeration to me.

[WinkyDink]

4. Agree 100%. Analysing a photograph is not hunting down and hanging from the nearest oak tree.

[cali]

5. posting the photos of people who are likely innocent

and speculating that that person is a terrorist bomber could have some very nasty results.

[limpyhobbler]

3. OK I went to look at what they are doing and here is my new opinion.

What they are doing is stupid and indecent. Posting pictures of people and guessing whether it is a terrorist. It didn't hit me until looking at it.

[gvstn]

6. I have no problem

With redditors dissecting photos and speculating. In theory that is what the police are doing when asking for photos and videos.

I have a huge problem with news aggregating sites picking this up as a story and plastering these photos on their "respectable" websites thus giving casual readers the idea that these pictures have any merit.

Gawker, Daily Mail and countless others have done this today. They are in the wrong.

[Oilwellian]

7. I know this...

I wouldn't want to be one of those people that everyone is speculating over. My bet is, if it were your picture, you would be very upset.

K&R