The narrative says the barbaric Islamic fundamentalists IS have become incredibly web savvy - as seen in their horrific beheading videos - and now threaten a whole new type of terror, which we in the west will have no idea how to deal with.
I'm not so sure.
 |
| IS video of the brutal murder of US journalist James Foley |
IS do, of course, have a better understanding of technology and the internet than their predecessors in Al Qaeda (probably helped by the brainwashed idiots flying over from countries like the UK).
But being better than other Middle Eastern terrorist organisations at using the web isn't really a very big ask. It's a difference of scale rather than type, and not one that makes them necessarily any more dangerous.
The most obvious way they've employed their internet marketing skills is in the promotion of the infamous beheading videos.
 |
| IS recruitment video |
There has been a lot of talk online about how the clips look incredibly professional - but I'm not overawed.
Yes, they are put together better than the camcorder-in-a-dark-room terrorist vids we're used to seeing. They have more than one angle, employ some effects, and switch between different shots with linking sequences like fade-outs.
But these are the kind of techniques any A-Level media student would be able to put together with ease. It's hardly The Matrix.
The savagery of the acts committed on screen is what gives them their power, not the production process.
Another worry for us in the west is the way the clips have been distributed and received online - the seemingly massive reach of the super-tekkie militants.
But, again, I think the truth is less worrying.
 |
| The now-infamous IS flag |
IS were synchronised in launching the clips online, but the mainstream video sharing sites removed them almost immediately. And IS's own servers were clearly not well enough equipped to deal with all the traffic, as the video download on their channels was very slow and crashed constantly.
Even when the clip was available, something very interesting happened on social media - people CHOSE not to watch it.
I refuse to see the video of #StevenSotloff. Sharing the video of his execution in social network only gives ISIS what they want.
— Imma Casanovas (@immacb) September 2, 2014
They enforced a sort of self-censorship, believing that by refusing to watch the video they were taking the power away from IS.
As with James Foley, I refuse to watch the Steven Sotloff video. You should too. If you do, you should not put it in front of others' eyes.
— Jack Moore (@JFXM) September 2, 2014
But they didn't just quietly shuffle off - most took the opportunity to post tributes to Steven Sotloff, remembering his life, rather than leering over his grisly demise.
I hope, and have faith that, the people I follow will not give IS the propaganda they want be tweeting the video of Steven Sotloff's murder.
— Alex Halpern (@HalpernAlex) September 2, 2014
ISIS Black Out. Refuse to share video or images and remember #stevenSotloff for the journalist that he was.
— Laura Wilkens (@Laura_Wilkens) September 2, 2014
IS have no way to combat this kind of smart, rational response, so they will never be able to win the information war (because, make no mistake, we are at war).
This point is even more salient when you compare the IS tech machine with the capabilities they're up against in the west.
Google, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter - all of the platforms they use are owned and operated by American companies. The foundations of their castle are built on western sand.
We have rightly been debating the extent to which the secret services should be allowed to watch our own digital movements - but I don't think any of us have any complaints about MI6 or GCHQ using their considerable expertise to monitor and shut down terrorist communications. And their methods and capabilities are far in advance of anything IS will be able to cook up.
These maniacs are a threat - a very real one. But we should be realistic about the capacity of their much-feared media machine, and also be confident in its eventual defeat.
No comments:
Post a Comment