Social media sites Facebook and twitter were blamed today by Government and Metropolitan Police spokespeople for fanning the UK #Londonriots and looting over the weekend.  Fingers were pointed at these social networking sites for the fact that they enable people to send out calls for people to gather together.

The disturbances happened after the fatal shooting of Tottenham father of four Mark Duggan who was allegedly killed in a minicab on Thursday by police firearm officers.

Blaming these sites is just placing a distraction for the real reasons for the unlawful behaviour that took place, highlighting a lack of understanding or will to understand of how people use social media today.

In fact, as Partner at Engine group Jonathan Akwue points out in his blog, it wasn’t Facebook or Twitter that fuelled the riots, but most probably BBM – BlackBerry Messenger.  BlackBerry is the phone of choice amongst a young demographic that took part in the riots, primarily because of BBM is virtually free (You just need a BlackBerry data plan) and unlike Facebook and Twitter, which are both open, it’s truly private.

BBM messages are encrypted and run through Research In Motion’s Canadian servers, and issue that has created many problems for the firm in India and the UAE, where they were threatened with being banned unless their encrypted communications were ‘opened-up’.

Emirates247 reported on 26th July that Abu Dhabi Police have warned that ‘spreading malicious rumours and fake news through BlackBerry messenger (BBM) is punishable by law and offenders could by jailed up to three years.’  The question now is if the UK Government is with it’s tarring of social networking and the recent extension of the #phonehacking judicial review going to push for something similar given that BBM is in all sense a private forum that is difficult to listen in on.

Blaming social networks is just a distraction, facilitating a reason for a possible change in policy that could be rushed through without understanding how these communication channels work.  But think about it, why would anybody wanting to do a crime share it on an open network?  Why not use a private channel?  Why can’t lawmakers understand this simple fact?

During the weekend riots Twitter was the channel used to report what was unfolding in Tottenham, Edmonton and Brixton.  A channel that captured in real-time what was organised on the locked-down BBM network.  If you wanted a real-time update you went to Twitter and used relevant search terms.

As Omar said in The Wire, “the game’s out there, and it’s play or get played. That simple.”  And at the moment the authorities are getting played.  Blaming social media confirms the distance that exists between them and the reasons that trigger the unrests.

*** UPDATE ***

BlackBerry UK have released the following statement in response to the use of BBM, ‘As in all markets around the world where BlackBerry is available, we cooperate with local telecommunications operators, law enforcement and regulatory officials. Similar to other technology providers in the UK we comply with The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act and co-operate fully with the Home Office and UK police forces.’

The International Olympic Committee has released it’s Social Media Guidelines for participants and other accredited persons at the London 2012 Olympic Games.

The four-page document is the IOC’s attempt to recapture the ground it never had when Twitter became the must-have channel for those competing at the winter Vancouver 2010 games.

Remember the death of Georgian Luger Nodar Kumaritashvili and how the footage of the tragic accident ended up on YouTube, Twitter and other social networking sites.  Happening just before the opening ceremony and the online chatter accentuated the lack of control and understanding that the Olympic committee had over social media and which cast a shadow over the Vancouver Olympics.

In the guidelines the IOC ‘actively encourages and supports athletes and other accredited persons at the Olympic Games to … post, blog and tweet their experiences.’ it directs those competing to avoid using social networking sites ‘for commercial and/or advertising purposes.’  If athletes and other accredited persons do break these guidelines then they risk accreditation being withdrawn.  More worrying for athletes is the threat of possible expulsion from the games.

So how will these guidelines affect the work of public relations agencies working with athletes and their sponsors?  Will non-accredited sponsors see these guidelines as a red rag to a bull?  How strong will ambush marketing play during the 2012 Olympics?  Remember how Dutch beer company Bavaria got, as The Daily Telegraph describes, ‘36 women wearing skimpy orange dresses attend the Holland versus Denmark game‘ to promote Dutch Bavaria beer in breach of Fifa guidelines.  Organisers of the stunt were then arrested.

What are your thoughts? How important will social networking play for brands that are sitting outside the tent and that will never be able to be a participant in the Olympic experience?

IOC Social Media Blogging and Internet Guidelines-London

A fashion soap opera befit of catwalk kings and queens enters its next episode when London Fashion Week starts this Friday and takes over from where New York left.  But these days aren’t just about the catwalk shows, with celebrities’ guests, young talent and great after-party shows.  It’s about the exhibitions, the hype and the machines behind them that are working hard to keep London ahead in the fashion race, especially since New York decided to move the date of their Fall 2009 to nearly coincide with the start of London’s Autumn/Winter presentations.

While New York rakes in the money through media and sponsorship deals London will lead with its collection of cutting-edge British designers that lead by example.  New and established designers such as Meadham Kirchhoff, Chritopher Kane, House of Holland, Paul Smith and Vivienne Westwood will once again lay down the marker with unique shows and styles.  Some at private events, so to befit the economic climate and capture the mood of the people and the media.

While in New York it’s all about the catwalk show, non-conformist London will be free to express itself with minimal and less ostentatious shows.  Understated might be the word, bringing new designs closer to us so that we can adapt it and create our own style.  Who knows, maybe it’ll distract us from all the negative and oh so consuming news.

I’ll be at London Fashion Week bringing you updates on the exhibitions, the style and the PR.  These events are crafted and I’ll be bringing you updates on how London Fashion Week responds to New York.

Ho, ho and ho again.  Chris Martin and the rest of the Coldplay gang were joined at The O2 on Tuesday by Simon Pegg for a Christmas sing-a-long.  The band were in a cheeky and festive mood, with plenty of comment from Chris on the X-Factor and the ‘Strictly Come Voting’ fiasco

Anyhow, Chris [Martin] appeared this morning on Moyle’s BBC Radio 1 show where he played some Christmas piano jingles.  Remains me of the days when there was such a thing as ‘Piano House’.  Urgh.  Right, less of me.  I am sure that you want to see the lads with their antlers and Christmas hats.

In an interview in yesterday’s Media Guardian, new BBC Five Live controller Adrian Van Klaveren confirmed that all of the stations daytime shows will by 2011 be broadcast from it’s new base in Salford, Manchester.  Surprising this is not. Unwelcome it most certainly is.

The move to Manchester’s purpose-built Media City has been in the air since the renewal of the BBC’s Charter way back when.

At the time the Department for Culture Media and Sport (DCMS) believed that the BBC had to part of the community, it had to be spread and shared with the nation. Or at least, thats what it sounded like. Needless to say that when it came to renegotiate the renewal of its Charter the BBC found themselves in quicksand. Incumbent Director General Mark Thompson, while at Channel 4, stated that Auntie had a “jacuzzi of cash”, something that came back to haunt him when he was in negotiations with the DCMS.

The BBC was going to move and there was nothing that could be done about it. Really, it was a case of Deal or no Deal. Who knows where the idea came from, but, like it or not the BBC was going to lift up some of its interests and move them to Manchester, and as we have discovered Five Lived is one such station. The question is how much has this been thought out?

Would the presenters move? The producers? The staff? If they were to, and here’s the crunch, for a station that prides itself in, not just news, but debate and talk shows, how would it go about securing speakers and spokespeople for it’s shows? After all, government departments are based in London, head-quarters for unions, companies, financial institutions are based in, wait for it, London.

So, remembering this, does the move to Manchester signal the end of face-to-face studio debate?  Van Klaveren has already signaled his dislike for Paxman-esque style interviews. So maybe, just maybe, the Five Live news that debates, analyses and dissects news will be dead sometime soon.

Good talk radio requires people. But the move to Manchester leaves the spokespeople behind. And as common as down-the-line interviews might be in PR, interviews with people in the studio are still needed. Moving away from the centre of business, government is not right.

But, the decision has been made and it looks like these ISDN are not just here to stay, but are set to increase, making debate that much more impersonal, which is what the BBC is becoming, impersonal and distant.

GQ Editor Dylan Jones

Here I was at a client today (I’m not Dylan Jones by the way), typing up a document when I was asked where I get my clothes from. Raising an eyebrow to the individual and casting a glance away from my keyboard, expecting a cheeky or dodgy remark, I asked, “why?”

See, the reason for this is that I am currently within a great corporate team where suits are the uniform of choice. After all, these are corporate issues, so we must all dress up in shirts, suits and tie. Well, all except me and a few others. You see, as much as I enjoy wearing a suit, I believe that there is a time and a place for one.

Anyway, the individual mentioned that he and a few others were heading over to a client, or potential client, for a meeting or pitch and that word had reached them that suits were a ‘no, no.’ Panic descended amongst him and a few others. The mere thought of going suit-less, well it was just difficult, confusing. Another hurdle to overcome to get the client or potential on their side.

Comments such as, “don’t they know we do corporate?” and , “I just don’t know how we should look!” came forth. I suggested dressing down, which really felt like asking Tom Ford to skip into the pub-shoe of choice, the Reebook classic. You know what I mean. Anyhow, they knew that it had to be done. I asked who the client was and on hearing this gave them my advice. To much laughter I added that maybe Gok Wan should come in to give them a style make over. No idea how that went down.

Anyhow, it really did make me think about how PRs dress and how we should dress? And if there are no-no’s in how we should present ourselves. After all, a suit can look the part and inspire confidence within a certain group of people, while others, as sharp as you might look, will think of you as stuffy, not flexible, not creative. Dressing for pitches or meetings is a minefield, which is best walked through with confidence.

While it would be ok to go with the newest jeans from Japan to a client, other creatives might see this as just opulence, where style might be more important to you than substance. Pre judging is comment place in our job, in our industry. As PRs we always want to make a good impression, even if we have to compromise our values, which is not right.

The next day, the group headed over, had the meeting and came back, with the job in the bag. And how did they look? Well, who cares. Job done!

As for me? Well the day before was some Paul and Joe items, 7 jeans and Paul Smith brogues, if you care.