Category: United Kingdom

London violence – Should we blame drill music?

There is a sub-genre of rap music known as drill currently causing controversy in the media and in government circles. This music has been blamed for the current wave of violence engulfing Britain’s inner cities, particularly in London. There has been a spike in the number of youth murders with the recent number being around 60 so far in London alone, this year. Just this week, a 23-year old drill rapper was murdered in a knife attack in Camberwell, South London. It is a sad and frightening trend as these are young lives being cut down prematurely. These deaths leave behind grieving families and friends with lifelong scars.

Drill is a sub-genre of hip-hop music which contains vivid accounts of violence and threats of violence. It is popular because it tells scary stories of life on the streets where one wrong choice could land you in jail or get you killed. Also, the wordplay can be very clever and the beat, catchy.

Drill - 67
The most famous UK drill group, 67 (Photo courtesy of facebook/@6ix7Official)

The London Metropolitan Police recently reached out to the social media giant, YouTube, to help in removing drill music from its platform, as the government believes it has a significant role to play in the rising number of youth murders. The Met Police believe the lyrical content in drill music glamourises knife attacks and gun violence. They believe gang members use these outlets to taunt each other which eventually spills out onto the streets.

This approach is not new, blaming art for social problems. In the early ’90s, ‘gangsta rap’, pioneered by rappers like Rakim and the group NWA, was in the spotlight for the crime wave in inner-city New York and Los Angeles. It was believed that the lyrics of gangsta rap promotes violence which played out on the streets. The police were worried and called for a ban on gangsta rap. It never happened as we live in a free society that respects all forms of art and does not allow the government to make moral choices for its citizens. If you ban gangsta rap, what about heavy metal, death metal, garage punk etc, some of which talk about drug overdoses and suicide?

This same discussion is now being had in Britain over drill music.

I think it is ludicrous to think music is the cause of the violence in London. Young people get involved in gangs and criminality not because they’ve listened to a particular genre of music, but because of their backgrounds and upbringing. These kids come from difficult backgrounds where criminality is seen as a survival tactic. Many of them grew up with no positive role models and very little positive life choices. Some have drug dependent fathers or mothers, absent fathers, from abusive households and mental health problems. It is these toxic elements that combine to create a criminal. This is where government resources need to be concentrated for a successful address of this problem.

In my opinion, the illegal drug trade sits at the core of the wave of youth deaths in the inner cities. These attacks are usually turf wars among various drug gangs for control of territory. These gangs may listen to drill music, but the music is not responsible for their actions. Did Lucky Luciano, Meyer Lansky and all the other infamous mob figures, who ran brutal gangs controlling cocaine and heroin distribution across America listen to rap or drill? The answer is no. Did the Kray twins, the brutal East London duo who ran sadistic protection rackets that brought fear to the streets of the capital, listen to rap or drill before they unleashed mayhem in the 1960s? The answer is no. The only common theme among all these infamous figures is their backgrounds, they all grew up in abject poverty with very little positive life choices.

Poverty is at the root of most social problems. It is a fact that poorer societies experience more violence than affluent ones. Some countries in Africa have seen more people die in brutal civil wars in a decade than relatively richer countries have seen in fifty years. Value for human life is low in economically deprived societies compared to affluent ones. Why should Peckham, South London be any different? This is a very deprived area of London’s inner-city, which has its own share of the current violence. The elements of this complex equation are poor housing, high unemployment, serious mental health issues, addiction and abuse in huge areas of our inner cities. Tackle these and you begin to unpick the problem.

Instead of pointing the finger at a genre of music, why not actually do something like improving employment prospects for the inner-city youth and actively create programmes that recruit from this talent pool. Put the inner city youth at the centre of positive change and support them with the tools they need. This is the way to tackle a problem, at the source. Criminalising a form of music is the lazy way out.

 

What amount of information does Facebook actually hold about me? – Here is what I found and how….

Facebook

In light of the recent Cambridge Analytica scandal, where a political consultancy in London has been accused of harvesting and applying Facebook users data inappropriately to shape political campaigns in the United States, I decided to find out exactly how much information Facebook holds about me.

I downloaded this via a single click in the settings section of my Facebook account. Find out how in the last paragraph of this article.

In the Photos and Videos sections, I was pleasantly surprised to see photos and videos that I had completely forgotten about. In the Messages section, I was able to view conversations with friends from 11 years ago when I joined Facebook! Some of these conversations took me right back to what my life was like at those points in time. The Timeline section shows all the comments I’ve ever posted and I was able to go back to my first post on the platform, including the date and time it was posted!

I was also able to see my ad history, not only ads I have clicked on Facebook but also on Instagram! Now, I have the Instagram app on my phone and I know the company was acquired by Facebook in 2012, but I didn’t realise that data from my activity on Instagram is being flowed directly into the Facebook app. I was able to see advertisers with my contact info as well.

In the Security section, I was able to view all devices I have used to log in to Facebook and the IP addresses of these devices including date and time stamps.

All these were interesting to me until I came across the Contact Info section where I was able to see that Facebook holds contact information from my mobile phone including people not even on my Facebook friends list! 70% of my phone contact list are known to Facebook, including the contact info for the Indian Takeaway I frequent on days I feel a bit peckish!

From what I was able to gather from a quick Google search, the Facebook app on your phone apparently has access to your phone contacts and you gave this permission away when you downloaded the app. I think you can manage this though and restrict this access by going into your settings.

The good thing about downloading this data is that you are able to see the evidence of the power of Facebook. Every Like, every comment, every photo you’ve posted, adverts you have clicked on and places you’ve been are being meticulously chronicled in great detail and made accessible to you and I am sure, the government and other authorities as well (on demand probably). How much of this data is accessible to corporate interests and political parties is less known. Cambridge Analytica’s parent company (prior to 2014), then known as SCL Elections, has been accused of interfering in the 2007 general elections in Nigeria where it is alleged that the company organised rallies in Nigeria to weaken support for the opposition. There are also allegations of political interference by the same company in Latvia and Trinidad and Tobago elections in 2006 and 2010 respectively.

If you feel there is anything on there you would be uncomfortable being made public (e.g. those old photos you were tagged in or the ones you posted, or even opinions you expressed a long time ago that you no longer hold), it is the time to clean up and check how much consent you are giving apps to access your personal data, in your settings.

The more disturbing aspect is how secure is this data? The recent Cambridge Analytica scandal shows it is not as secure as we would like it to be. I know a lot of people say if you have nothing to hide, then you shouldn’t worry. But I think this is a naive position as you should be concerned about how much information about you is available to a private company who makes billions of dollars trading in that very information. Imagine giving the keys to your house to a private insurance company for example, and saying you have nothing to hide! That would be unthinkable. Facebook is no longer a passive fun app where we post smileys to far-flung friends, it is a very powerful machine hoovering up and digesting every aspect of our lives and making a huge profit from it.

Information about you could be used for positive as well as negative or criminal purposes, protecting it is important. In an age of identity theft, impersonations and blackmail, you ignore this at your peril.

If Facebook holds this much information about us, I wonder what data Google and Apple keep about us all and what they do with it or ‘can’ do with it!

To view your own Facebook data (see screenshots below), go to your settings in your Facebook app (desktop or mobile) and in the General account settings tab, click ‘Download a copy of your Facebook data’. It will take about 10-15 minutes and an email will be sent to you with a link to the downloaded data.

Justin Fashanu – The making of a tragedy

I had the opportunity to see a powerful Netflix documentary this weekend about the life and death of Justin Fashanu, once Britain’s most popular black footballer. I remember hearing the story as a teenager growing up in Nigeria but never really knew the details. The story is a tragic cocktail of betrayal, abandonment, pain and sadness.

Justin Fashanu
The Fashanu brothers – Justin (right) and John (left) [Photo credit: http://www.theguardian.com]

Netflix’s “Forbidden Games – The John Fashanu story” is a deep and disturbing look at the troubled life of two brothers growing up in the harsh, racially charged atmosphere of 1970s and ’80s Britain.

Born to a Nigerian father and a Guyanese mother in 1961 in the London borough of Hackney, Justin and his younger brother John were put in foster care at ages four and three respectively after their parents split up and their father moved back to Nigeria.

Justin and John were eventually fostered by a white middle-class couple in Norfolk who took care of them and provided them with the stability of family life. In the documentary, this couple recalled how the brothers were two lovely little kids bursting with energy.  But Justin never got over the fact that their mother gave them up. In the documentary, Pearl, their biological mother, said she didn’t have the means to look after the children after their father left and had no choice but to give them up to be fostered.

Justin-Fashanu
Justin at Norwich FC (Picture credit: http://www.themirror.uk)

The documentary reminded us of Britain of the ’70s and ’80s when being black was a social stigma and the consequences were severe. Justin and his brother John were the only black children in an overwhelmingly white Norfolk village and experienced the cold reality of prejudice at the school playground. But Justin had a talent that made him shine, he was fast and quick with the football than any other kid. He had an athletic build and a charismatic personality. He quickly got noticed and made his debut when he was signed to Norwich FC, and eventually to Nottingham Forest in 1981, which marked the high point of his career as a professional footballer. He was transferred to Forest for a whopping £1million. The most expensive black player in English football history, up to that time.

But fame and fortune brought out previously latent attitudes in Justin, he became stubborn and arrogant, he would park his expensive cars in inappropriate places and would refuse to move it when asked to. Justin loved the fast life, money, cars and clubbing. These soon took a toll on his career as his performance dipped on the pitch. For such an expensive player, the expectations were high and the pressure was huge. Meanwhile the news was going round that Justin was frequenting gay bars in Nottingham, and in 1980s Britain, this was not something you would shout from the rooftops. The environment was hostile to homosexuals and Justin knew that his career would be jeopardised if he admitted being gay. His manager however, Brian Clough, a veteran football manager and homophobe, had had enough of Justin’s below expectation performance on the pitch and the rumours of him being gay was the final straw. Justin was sacked from the club, and marked the beginning of a slippery slope for him. He started to drift from one football club to the next, picked up a knee injury and at one point became a born-again christian.

Justin visited Nigeria to find is biological father but it wasn’t the visit he planned. He thought he would be going into his father’s arms wide open for him, but it was rather a disappointment and that was the first and last time he ever met with his biological father.

As Justin’s career slowed down, John’s (his younger brother) was picking up. John rose through the ranks to the top of the football tree when he got signed to Wimbledon in 1986 and eventually went on to play for England. John was now the face of the Fashanu brand in Britain. The tables turned.

In 1990, Justin came out publicly in The Sun newspaper (Britain’s largest tabloid) as being gay, despite John’s efforts to prevent him going public with it. John went as far as offering Justin a huge amount of money, more than the tabloid would pay him for the story. John believed this revelation would harm his own career which he has worked so hard to achieve. John had a difficult relationship with his older brother due to his overwhelming popularity and success,  which meant John lived in his shadows. In the documentary, John described  how if he achieved something, people would say well that is expected, and when he didn’t they would say why not, ‘his brother could do it’. It was a difficult corner to get out of for John. He also described how Justin became his arch enemy after he came out publicly as gay, he dissociated himself from Justin and they literally lost touch for years afterwards. In Britain of that time, you cannot be seen to be openly sympathetic to homosexuality. It was a macho environment, supported by politicians who banded it as a perversion that needed to be contained. The documentary even has a footage of Margaret Thatcher declaring at a Conservative party conference, how children had to be protected from such ideas. It is true when they say the past is a different country. It truly was a Britain difficult to recognise!

After numerous attempts to jumpstart his career, Justin got embroiled in controversy when lurid details of alleged sexual affairs with some British MPs were documented in the tabloids, with himself being the source of these details. He later retracted the claims saying he made them up for the money. He was at rock bottom by this time. Broke and desperate.

He went back to America and coached a small football club. But this soon unravelled when in April 1998, Justin was accused of sexual assault on a 17 year old boy and the police put out a warrant for his arrest. Justin fled back to England fearing incarceration. He denied the charges and claimed he fled because he feared he wouldn’t get a fair trial because he was gay. In May 1998, Justin was found dead in a garage in East London after an apparent suicide with a note saying he was innocent of these charges. He was 37.

The documentary was very moving and demonstrated how events in childhood usually set the pace for life afterwards. Justin felt a sense of abandonment when his mum gave him and his brother up for foster care. He couldn’t come to terms with this, even when his mum tried to explain her side of the story. Justin battled demons buried deep in his life but wore the mask of a confident, charming man who appeared to be in control.

John sobbed during the filming of the documentary as he watched old videos of Justin wishing John would fight his corner. He felt abandoned by John at a time he needed him the most. John’s reaction was however his own survival strategy at a time when having a gay brother could finish his own career as well. John had lost a brother with whom he endured so much with as kids, shared happy and difficult times together, cried and laughed with. It was a sad ending for both brothers.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle – A look at how their union could be affected by UK immigration rules

Harry and Meghan
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle (Photo credit: Cosmopolitan)

The news came this week of the engagement of Prince Harry to Meghan Markle and plans for a Royal wedding next year. It was welcome news and myself and the rest of the country are so happy for them. Finally the prince has found love and will be settling down.

However, under UK immigration rules, Meghan Markle will be subject to residency laws which will see the couple meet stringent requirements after their wedding if they plan to live together permanently in the UK.

For mere mortals who live far away from the pomp and pageantry of British royalty, to bring over your non-European spouse into the UK, you would need to first prove to the Home Office that you can support your spouse without recourse to public funds. This means meeting an income threshold of £18,600 ($25,000) annual earnings to obtain a spouse visa for Meghan. This income threshold is based only on the income of the UK sponsor, in this case Prince Harry’s.

“The non-UK partner cannot count their income towards the threshold if they are working abroad, because of the concern that they may stop working after they come to the UK” – The Migration Observatory, The University of Oxford

According to the Migration Observatory, 40% of UK workers did not earn above £18,600 a year in 2015. We all know Harry left the army in 2015 and had not earned taxable income since then, rather he has been doing a lot of charity work and royal duty, from important conservation work to supporting mental health charities. He could however meet this requirement through the Duchy of Cornwall, the Royal estate which would provide Harry with unearned income. If Harry was an ordinary citizen, unearned income would not qualify for the Home office income requirements.

This process is made even more complicated if the couple already have children (not the case in Harry and Meghan’s situation). If the couple already have children, the annual income threshold of £18,600 ($25,000) required jumps by £3,800 ($5,100) for the first child and £2,400 ($3,200) for additional children after the first child.

Many people across the UK are being prevented from bringing their non-EU spouse (and children) into the UK by this regulation. Many families have been split apart because they cannot prove clearly to the Home Office how they meet this requirement. According to the Migration Observatory, an Home Office impact assessment in 2012 estimated that between 13,600 – 17,800 fewer people would be prevented from coming to the UK per year as a result of the income threshold. The actual figure would be much higher.

After this income hurdle, then comes the ‘financial cost’ and ‘time’ hurdles. It will be five years after Harry and Meghan get married before she can apply for permanent residency in the UK. She will initially get 2.5 years after the application for residency after their wedding next year, then she will have to renew this after this time for another 2.5 years (a total of 5 years). After 5 years she can then apply for permanent UK residency. Shortly after this she can apply for British citizenship. For ordinary citizens, this is a very costly process. In all you are looking at around £7,000 ($9,400) from getting married to becoming a permanent UK resident.

These requirements will likely will not apply to Prince Harry because he is Prince Harry, but many ordinary lives are affected by this on a day to day basis. People who love each other are penalised heavily because one of them comes from a non-European country. If they were from a European country like France, Netherlands or Poland, it is absolutely fine, you could live together in the UK immediately (this may change after Brexit though, who knows).