The EDL online
by Jamie Bartlett
|
Today, Mark Littler and I have released a paper about the English Defence League. In it, we argue that the group is not simply a street movement of thugs as many assume, but would be better understood as a large Facebook group with a small militant wing. While around 1,000 or so people march or demonstrate fairly regularly, the overwhelming majority of its activity takes place online. It is here – through its thousands of Facebook fans that you’ll find the beating heart of the group. This means that, to understand the group, one has to understand this online army people too. Bizarrely, though, no-one has ever tried to survey them, although it is remarkably easy to do. So we did – and 1,295 online supporters responded. It gives a broader, more nuanced picture of the EDL than hitherto. Supporters are a mixed bunch, ranging from the committed peaceful democrat demanding that homosexuals be spared the horrors of Sharia Law courts all the way to the rabid Islamophobes. Yet overall, what seems to define them is not a violent hatred towards all Muslims – though that does exists – but pessimism about the UK's future, worries about immigration, and high levels of joblessness. This is tied together with a proactive pride in Britain, British history and values, which they see as being under attack from Islam. While some find the chance of a Saturday afternoon punch-up to good to miss, the majority disavow violence. Unusually, it is how we got this information that is the really interesting bit. This is the first time, as far as we know, that a think-tank has tried to survey a Facebook group. There are inevitable statistical weaknesses of course, but the potential is endless. The fact that millions of people now relate to politics through a mélange of virtual and ‘real-world’ activism means there are now enormous data sets about people’s preferences, likes, dislikes, opinions – 5 billion pieces of content are shared on Facebook every day. It is not just social media marketers and commercial reputational analysts who should get into the game: to marshall this evidence can help us understand social movements, extremist threats and modern activism. In one week we will have another piece of research out which explores these issues still further - so watch this space. |
Peter Williams
While I admire the attempt at surveying the minds that control the beating heart of the EDL, online at least, and the tapping of this contemporary network of communication, I do have to question the factuality, not of the surveyors, but of the surveyed.
How were the participants chosen and how were they vetted? Within part of the core of the EDL, Facebook has been an untrustworthy source of gauging the mindset of the EDL and, certainly during 2010, was mistrusted by many. The issue being that anybody could create a personality and provide commentary that could skew the representation and public face of the group. This, of course, applies to any group, not just of the EDL. However, it could be argued that, although certainly a minority extreme voice genuinely exists, such a voice would be amplified by motivated sock-puppets wishing to hijack an investigation of general opinion.
Was there a reason why Facebook was chosen as a reliable source of participants, despite it's difficulty with regards to moderation, as opposed to well-moderated related fora?
Peter Williams
The relevant section within your publication has already addressed my concerns. Regards.
A Nony Mouse
With all the respect in the world, I cannot understand how you pretend to still expect people to take you seriously.
This is due to the way you have failed to act as promised in comments you made on the thread shown below with regards to 911 ...
http://www.demos.co.uk/blog/engaging-
You write articles which you expect to be taken seriously but then fail to keep to the same standard when asked to respond to serious questions.
In case you are not aware of the severity of the situation, there is much more at stake here than silly things like your job or career. We are all in this together and we need to find a way to stimulate dialogue and new ways out of the mess we find ourselves in.
I would much prefer it if you openly came out and defended the status quo with some kind of intelligent debate based on facts and not opinions.
Because to do what you continue to do simply because you "didn´t know any better" simply isnt going to cut the mustard when you have to explain to your children what your part was in the grim future that is desired by many in positions of power.
Joan Walters
After decades of enforced ethnic and cultural diversity, backed up by draconian laws, and a general negative attitude to the views of indigenous Britons, there was bound to be a reaction. Sensible debates and political solutions offered by the British National Party have been vilfied, distorted and marginalised by the media, thus creating a worsening situation and the real potential for violence and even civil war. You don't need expensive and time consuming "research" and "reports" to know this - it's common sense. Time to reap what the elites have sowed.