The Internet's Double-Edged Sword: Boston

The one downside of the Internet is the greatest thing about it. Who knew.

With the unfortunate events of the Boston Marathon bombing, the Internet forum of users have given their feedback on who was responsible, leaving others worried for their lives at their wrong assumptions. Sunil Tripathi is innocent, and most importantly, still missing since he disappeared in March. One Reddit user in this article (which I highly recommend reading) even posted a comment apologizing to Sunil's family for assuming their son was one of the perpetrators.

But those on Reddit are not the only guilty. People on Facebook, Twitter, and 4Chan also collaborated to incriminate Sunil, and they were wrong. It could be a race thing, especially considering how news media repeatedly single-out minorities as criminals. But I'll let you analyze that at your leisure. Right now, this is about Freedom of Speech and the virtual forum.

The Internet is amazing, because it is a social space where people can gather and share opinions and move toward social change. The Arab Spring is often credited as occurring because of social media spreading the story of Mohamed Bouazizi who immolating himself in protest in Tunisia. However, the downside of the Internet is clear in this case of Sunil being the wrongly accused. Even though the media attention highlighted the fact that he is missing, and may even contribute to helping find him, there will still be a stigma placed on him and his family. Even though he has been accused wrongfully, he'll still be associated with the Boston bombing and will be stigmatized.

Perhaps this is why it is hard to find reader comments on BBC News. The UK also does not have a Freedom of Speech amendment as we do in America. Think about that.

Error 404: The terrorist you requested was not found.

Overall, the Internet is a great place for being a space transcending government where people can discuss and share. But when this sharing affects someone's life, from assuming someone is a suspect to cyberbullying, it can be a detrimental thing. We need to be aware of the comments and assumptions we make online, especially with people we do not know. If there was a rulebook for the Internet, this situation with Boston and Sunil would be an example of the detriment of online forums. But there is no rulebook. That's just not proper Internet etiquette.

Imagine what this means for politics. The Internet is becoming a new arena for discrimination, as noted about Google AdSense allegedly aligning stereotypical African-American names with running criminal record check ads online. Clearly, the Internet is more than telling your friends that you just ate Taco Bell and watched Twilight. It has deeper implications.

I don't blame those who accused Sunil of being the bomber. Times of crisis make people try to find a solution as soon as possible and blaming Sunil was probably the mass's way of fixing the problem and trying to heal. It's not exactly scapegoating, but identifying someone is better than people believing that there is an unknown terrorist still on the loose. I do, however, think people need to be more careful about what their voices mean as a collective in spaces of virtual free reign. You never know who is watching and waiting to jump on your words. It can be a good thing, as far as social change, but a bad thing, as far as incriminating the innocent.

This is the Internet culture.