Facebook starts with fun. Mark Zuckerberg, 2nd semester student at Harvard University, USA, February 2004, created a dating site: Facemash.com. Then become Facebook. Enlarged until now (Facebook, 2010).
After Facebook growing up, a lots of peoples having fun in Facebook. Included a mother in Bogor, the posting insulted the Surabaya Mayor, Tri Rismaharini. It was viral. It became a legal case.
Here’s the video:
The cases like this are flare. Constantly happening. The impact was unexpected. It can be social damage.
- The attack – vandalism of two shrine and five temples in Tanjung Balai, Asahan, North Sumatra, 2016. It started by the incitement through the social media.
- SAFEnet recorded 100 cases of persecution from January to November 2017.
- KontraS Data: At least 48 cases of persecution based on religion and beliefs occurred during January – October 2017.
Because, (Wolf, 2010) stated: The online haters victimize individuals or groups.
They are recruiting the followers. They evoked the courage. They stir up the individuals in their homes with the similar thoughts.
It must be observed, the tip of hatred speech raises violence. Generates threats, abuse, racist, sexist, homophobic, symbolic, psychological and emotional attacks (O’Brien and Yar, 2008).
The law enforcement tested. The struggle between the pressures of public opinion, versus the social damage that a case causes. The public is disinclined or it is broken.
There are two opinions. Siegel (2012) acknowledges that law enforcement has a deterrent effect. Also control crime.
But, (Siegel, 2012) given the notes, whereas law enforcement alone, it hasn’t been proven can reduced the crime rates.
It can even cause collisions in the societies. It triggered public distrust of the police.
At this point, the Republic of Indonesia National Police has been ‘swayed’. They consider. As a result, the detention of suspects was suspended.
Certainly, there were some cheered and some were disappointed.
Don’t get the estimation wrong. Be careful. This seemingly simple case has a mass background. There are the large scale. The results formed by politicians. In the struggle for power.
So, where we will bring the cases like this?
O’Brien and Yar (2008) in their book, offered: Social Control. This is criminology.
By definition: Social Control, involves various means to achieve conformity with social rules and norms.
“That includes the socialization, parenting, group pressure and ideology, as well as the formal mechanisms, related to policing and punishment.” (O’Brien and Yar, 2008).
This concept later on tends to refer to Michel Foucault’s version of Social Control (15 October 1926 – 25 June 1984). Social theory expert from France.
Michel Foucault’s of Social Control definition can be found in the article written by Wilson (2001).
“That Social Control, which was resurrected in the 1980s, it is used as a means. Through a complex and contradictory analysis of justice. In order to achieve an order in a democratic society.” (Wilson, 2001)
Simply put: Social Control is not just an institutional practice but also train and exploit the power. It starting from construction, ideology, to the production of meaning.
There is Garland’s (2001) regarding analysis of Social Control. In a book it called The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society.
Garland (2001) no longer refers to it as Social Control, but he called “a culture of control tout court”.
By definition. That is not just socialization, education and its kind. But also includes aspects of power and culture in society.
The point is there must be reward and punishment by formal and informal institutions.
Social Control carried out by the Social Control Agency.
Clinard and Meier (2011) define Social Control Agents as: Peoples who administer sanctions.
They are: police, prosecutors, and judges in the criminal justice system.
“Including employers, psychiatrists, teachers. No less important, the religious leaders who promise heaven and threatens hell.” (Clinard and Meier, 2011).
In other words, in the case of our discussion, the Social Control Agency is not just the police.
If the police are alone, they will enter the ‘swayed’ situation. Later on, they considering. As a result, the detention of suspects was suspended. Although the legal process continues.
As a result, the deterrent effect does not occur.
As a result, the humiliating behavior was emulated by the mothers while cooking rice. It was large scale, and she was proud.
The next result was de-legitimation of public functionary.
The next result … (*)