Internet

In 2002, through internet, a football fan in England organised a violent clash in south east London between supporters of rival football teams which subsequently came to be known as the Battle of Maze Hill. This was by no means the first or the last time that such violent clashes have been triggered by the use of information technology and yet there seems to be no end to this type of online violence. In fact it has only increased in many forms.

Today, more than ever, the internet has become a convenient tool for those wishing to incite violence at sports events. The concept of internet hooliganism is applied particularly to football ‘fans’ in Europe, notably the UK. The notorious Carlisle United supporter Paul Dodd used to run one such website and on it, he talked of “the ‘buzz’ – the feeling of getting the fist, boot or pint glass into the anonymous face of a rival yob.” He also boasted online of having being jailed over 17 times.

That the internet is a powerful tool which provides cheap and easy access to a vast reservoir of information and entertainment is a given and cannot be wished away. But given the increase in numbers of those with access to the web and the fact that not all users are benign or use the net for the good, it is only natural that misuse or illegal use of the net will be prevalent. The new dark side of the internet is hooliganism. From the street, the hooligan and criminal have moved to the internet not only to wage war against the law but to also mould impressionable minds.

Internet chats, blogs, games and videos today tend to give the impression that violence, or violent talk is fashionable. In addition, it has the advantage of not bringing the police to your doorstep. Or at least that what most people think. In the western world, there are already laws in place, like the UK Public Order Act of 1986 that has some provisions to tackle hooliganism over the internet. Hooliganism by its very social definition sends out a negative signal and its implications for the internet are truly far reaching. If a global terrorist can encrypt his messages on pictures and transmit them, nothing stops a gangster from using the net to sell his illegal wares.

Take the recent example from the US where the victory of the San Francisco Giants in the world cup baseball series in November 2010 became an excuse for a mayhem in the streets of San Francisco, a looting spree that was seen ‘live’ by all those with access to the net. On Twitter, a blow-by-blow account of everything was available from the police losing battles with the crowds to store windows being smashed and a bus being torched. On YouTube, a dozen videos of mob violence, including a crowd pulling a driver and passenger out of a car window and beating them, were swiftly posted. Seems like a surreal scene out of nowhere and yet this is exactly what happened. How does one explain this phenomenon where some revellers in San Francisco were even using the location-based social networking site Foursquare to “check in” to the most active trouble spots? So much for live telecasts!

A quick search on the net throws up several choices for hooligan games. Children are creating hooligan games with real life characters with guns and other weapons that are used on the street. Some years ago, the media reported the coming of the ‘Little Hooliganz’ game, in which boys as young as seven will train their thug to take on rival hooligan ‘firms’ and attack members of the public. Characters in the game will steal money to buy beer and weapons, which also include scimitars, chainsaws, cricket bats, crow bars and knuckledusters. So how does one even know this menace is happening? How does one monitor and what sort of laws can be made to stem the growing tide of internet hooliganism and abuse. After all, it could be verbal abuse that is being communicated over the net, without so much as a boo! Existing laws the world over are still inadequate to keep track and crack down on offenders. After all, in legal terms, the crime has to be committed on one’s soil. If the IP address is outside the country then it would be difficult to prosecute the group.

Of course, to say that it is impossible to stem the tide would be to admit defeat. China has a simple way of dealing with the problem by blocking the websites they do not want people to see. So what does a democracy like India do? Does it use the censor’s scissors and block everything? That way one part of the problem will get sorted out. What about hooligan games on video and DVDs? The danger of blocking everything is that it will stem the growth of India as an IT power. Answers are not easy to this one and certainly the new proposed internet control laws that are being considered by the Indian government may only complicate matters.

(The views expressed by the author are personal)