Anti-social media: Former New Zealand prime minister Helen Clark on social media harm after the Christchurch terror attacks
I Interrupt the former leader of my native New Zealand, Helen Clark, in the middle of a Twitter and Facebook purge.
“Social media management” she says, dictating a response to one of the provocateurs or well-wishers.
It’s all part of overseeing a social media following of more than 200,000, I’m sure, but especially fitting since the ex-prime minister was in London – along with other former government heads who make up the leadership alliance Club de Madrid – for a talk on how to combat populism, fake news and social media.
A more regrettable coincidence is that we’re speaking mere weeks after a white supremacist live-streamed a terrorist attack in our homeland.
The murder of fifty Muslims in two mosque attacks in Christchurch by gunman Brenton Tarrant was put online for the world to see.
Clark was in Baku, Azerbaijan when she heard the news, but her reaction was like any New Zealander: “Just shock and disbelief… We have never had anything like this.” The response from authorities, New Zealanders and current leader Jacinda Ardern was praised as compassionate, with the country also quickly taking decisive action on strengthening gun laws.
Clark makes an obvious comparison between world leaders: “What a different response to the US, where tragically hardly a month goes by when you don't have mass shootings. Now does that ever lead to action at the federal government level? No.”
Tech companies have been widely castigated for their response. The massacre was shared millions of times on social media channels – so widely that families knew loved ones were dead days before official declarations because they had seen footage of their killings on Whatsapp and Twitter.
As clicks and shares are the metrics of success in social media, grieving New Zealanders asserted that tech giants were profiting from tragedy.
Facebook said it had removed 1.5m uploads of the mosque attack video, while Youtube said at one stage it could not remove the content as quickly as it was being uploaded. Clark says they have offered "different levels of response".
“Facebook [as the accused’s broadcasting method] has been working with the New Zealand authorities, because the case has got to be mounted. But people are looking for answers from the social media companies and they don't see much,” Clark says.
The former premier asks why – given the advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) – algorithms, AI or moderators couldn’t identify Tarrant’s video as offensive content as it happened.
Instead, police alerted Facebook, which took it down – but not before the content had been copied and reposted. “We’re told it is so difficult for the social media companies to train AI to recognise this real-life violence. Well, OK, there isn’t a lot of imagery of killers live-streaming what they do, but there is plenty of imagery from the Rambo movies of horrible stuff where you can build a picture of what you’re trying to stop.”
The event is a stark reminder to Clark that “we are always playing catch-up” with regards to regulating technology.
“This is a killer who has flourished on social media… We have regulation in traditional media, but social media has been gangland, no rules. So either they are going to have to get very smart, very quickly or the regulators will step in and things will get interesting.”
Profits for Silicon Valley tech giants won’t dry up based on the actions of one mass killer in New Zealand, but their response may prove that public trust in social media already has.
Clark shares a nugget from her earlier roundtable on fake news and social media: “Edelman found the least trusted information source is social media. Surely that has got to be bad for business and you may find ethical models rising up which cut down the behemoths.”
The dark corners of the internet are but one part of a complex problem of violent extremism. Clark, who as the former head of the United Nations Development Programme managed a $5bn (£3.8bn) budget and oversaw operations in 177 countries, knows how to advance projects despite intercultural divisions.
Economic opportunity and business engagement have been a force for good in the face of extremism, she says. “In countries troubled by violent extremism, I’m talking Mali or Somalia for example, some of terrorism’s roots lie in severe underdevelopment, with not much for young men to do.
"The people who can afford to pay are the ones who traffic guns and people, or can pay you to be a jihadist – but it’s a complex equation.”
I suggest, at the other end of the spectrum in well-developed economies, the workplace can be the best place to get exposure to people of different cultures and faiths. Clark agrees: “In diverse societies, London for example, employers can set a good tone for the workforce, to value and appreciate diversity and respect for each other.
"In public life, communities want to see institutions that look like them.”
And what about what the top echelon of business looks like? "Well, on the FTSE, no that's not so diverse…and let's not start on gender because women are still somewhat excluded.
"But ultimately, the tone that is set from the top in the workforce is obviously very important".
We pivot from one complex problem to the next: Brexit. What does Clark – who led New Zealand to sign with China's first free trade agreement with a western nation in 2008 – think of the current state of negotiations and political theatre?
Any advice?
She sniggers, thankful the days of political horse-trading are behind her. "Well, they've still go a couple of weeks to sort it out…"