The “wisdom of crowds” apparently “doesn’t apply to terrorist manhunts,” said Nick Bilton in The New York Times. When thousands of amateur sleuths flocked to the online community Reddit last week to scour footage of the Boston bombings for clues to who planted the explosives, they did “more damage than good,” falsely implicating several innocent people, including a 17-year-old track star and a missing Brown University student. It didn’t take long for the self-appointed Sherlock Holmeses, with their circled faces and flimsy theories, to become an online “lynch mob,” said Rebecca Greenfield in TheAtlantic.com. Even as forum leaders urged caution, many pointed the finger at brown-skinned people they deemed suspicious. As social media amplified raw speculation into accusations, a number of innocent people saw their “good names maimed in public.”
This is what happens when untrained civilians try to play detective, said Alexis Madrigal, also in TheAtlantic.com.Investigating bombings simply isn’t a job for the crowd, because in a civil society, “due process” is critical to police work. “Imagine if people were standing around in Boston pointing fingers at people” and accusing them of terrorism. This was no different. It’s “plain, old vigilantism.” Before Reddit and Twitter, said Meghan Daum in the Los Angeles Times,most people could react to a national tragedy only by “making donations to the American Red Cross and forwarding emails about candlelight vigils.” Now, thanks to social media, anyone can be “a player, not a spectator,” in history-making events. The end result sometimes is a “mountain of misinformation.”
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
