Flash Mobs

Submitted by Amanda Fritz on May 14, 2007 - 10:05am.

OK, there must be more to this than I could gather from reading the Oregonian's Editorial today. Here are the first paragraphs:

"Portland, we have a problem, and it's only going to get worse as the weather gets better: Big swarms of teenagers, called "flash mobs," collecting in various hot spots around the city.

Just because you haven't encountered such a mob yet doesn't mean you won't. Often, they text-message each other on their cell phones about where to go next, keeping one step ahead of the police. Right now, one favorite hangout is McCoy Park.

These groups of kids are intimidating and inherently dangerous, not only for anyone who gets in their way, but also for the kids themselves. Many aren't nearly as old or tough as they look. They aren't lost to this community by any means. But they're certainly headed in the wrong direction."

What kinds of problems are these crowds of teenagers causing? How are they "intimidating and inherently dangerous"?

Whenever I'm around mass quantities of teenagers, which is relatively often in a variety of situations, the feeling that overwhelms me isn't fear, rather the sensation of being rendered completely invisible. And if I were out in a park anywhere, after 10:15 p.m., I wouldn't feel particularly safe, in fact I might feel more safe with a large crowd of teenagers than with one or two. Most Portland parks close at midnight, anyway. But what it the problem the Editorial wants solved - the fact that since being in a park after midnight is outlawed, only outlaws breaking both park rules and curfew are there?

I need more information here. All the Editorial tells us is that kids like to text-message each other and gather in different locations. Presumably part of the problem is that the assemblies are after curfew hours (in Portland, 10:15 p.m. if there's school the next day, midnight if there isn't), since the O calls for greater pressure on parents to attend classes if their kids are out later. This despite the fact that all the parents cited in a previous sweep were mothers. The Editorial doesn't mention that - it states,

"So it was disappointing the other day when some Portland parents failed to show up for the first of a series of classes designed to help them. Portland police had cited these parents as part of a curfew sweep earlier this spring, and a juvenile court judge had asked them to attend the series of classes."

Are they talking about the mothers? Odd that the word "parent" is chosen, when in this O blog post, the headline is "Moms". If they recognized only mothers were available to be cited, perhaps there would be a wider conversation about family issues/needs when children are out late unsupervised. And did anyone ask the mothers what time and place would be convenient for them to attend such classes?

If the police couldn't find even one father to ticket for curfew infractions, maybe the solution to the problem isn't as simple as it may seem. From reading this Editorial, I can't even tell what the problem is.

»

Also, these aren't flash

Submitted by theonetruebix on May 14, 2007 - 9:45am.
Also, these aren't flash mobs.
»

We formed "flash mobs" every

Submitted by dave lister on May 14, 2007 - 12:40pm.
We formed "flash mobs" every summer night when I was growing up. Around dusk all the kids in the neighborhood (and there were a lot of us baby boomers) congregated at 34th and Insley. We usually played "Kick the Can". Dave Lister
»

To give some context, I

Submitted by Steve Beattie on May 14, 2007 - 2:17pm.
To give some context, I *think* the editorial is some kind of response to this article about recent incidents at the New Columbia development: http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/portland_news/1178243709220890.xml&coll=7 But it's, uh, interesting that the so-called flash mobs were the sole issue the editorial board decided to raise... (And I know this has been hashed over elsewhere, but the O's search function is entirely broken; searching for "New Columbia" doesn't bring up the article above. I suspect that it has to do with the original Dead Tree article being in a special neighborhood news insert and not the regular broadsheet pages.)
»

Three interesting comments -

Submitted by Amanda Fritz on May 14, 2007 - 2:40pm.
Three interesting comments - thank you. Is there another recent article in the O that may be related, has anyone seen? Seems to me the teens might need to pick a theme each night, like Santas or Brides. Of course, if we older people point out they're not doing anything unusual by gathering together to hang out, teenagers might stop doing it for fear of growing up to become like us. Is that the desired result?
»

Update: Matt Davis on

Submitted by Amanda Fritz on May 14, 2007 - 4:45pm.
Update: Matt Davis on Blogtown posts this link to a Mercury report on real criminal activity by gatherings of teenagers. Did this coverage appear in the O? If not, maybe that's why the Editorial was vague about the problem?
»

The O failed to give

Submitted by Sue Hagmeier on May 14, 2007 - 7:48pm.
The O failed to give context. This was a problem last summer, with large groups of young people, some injuries and property damage, and police overwhelmed. There is real worry about this in some parts of the community as warm weather approaches. Of course, it's possible that when 300-400 people gather at a particlular intersection or park late at night they are just planning to hang out together. In fact, chances are most of them see it that way. However, people who know a lot more about this than I do are pretty worried about it given some scenes that have already occurred, and it doesn't take but a few with other ideas to change the tone of the gathering to something scary to participants, nearby residents and police. Back to the O: I'm not sure their weighing in had any value, since those who know about it are sufficiently concerned, and those who don't wouldn't learn much from reading their editorial. But the problem is the lack of willingness to look at causes. Why don't these kids have anything better to do? Why are they susceptible to "mob" behavior, flash or otherwise? And why aren't there adults who are connected enough to the young people to know when something is planned with the potential to get out of control? Years ago, as the funding for schools ratcheted downward and several support positions came to be seen as frills, I remember a teacher remarking that he found himself learning not to notice that a kid was showing signs of trouble, because there was nobody to send that kid to. Meanwhile, we keep applying a deficit model to schools in some neighborhoods, as if rich kids need enrichment and poor kids need boot camp, starting with kindergarten. Frankly, the curfew enforcement program comes across the same way. We'll require you to come to a class so we can "fix" how you're raising your kids. Maybe we need more adults who can remember what it was like to be a kid, even if kids nowadays have different tools of rebellion at their disposal. But for now, yes, I know some very level headed people, not prone to alarmism, who are indeed alarmed about this phenomenon.
»

Thank you, Sue, for the

Submitted by Amanda Fritz on May 14, 2007 - 7:52pm.
Thank you, Sue, for the context and for your insights.
»

What's that? Did somebody

Submitted by Pete Forsyth on May 16, 2007 - 11:25am.
What's that? Did somebody bring up the Oregonian's useless web site and public safety in the same breath? That's my favorite topic! Seriously...when are their now-famous corporate memos going to address these major issues?
»

And yes, I was totally

Submitted by Pete Forsyth on May 16, 2007 - 11:28am.
And yes, I was totally baffled by that editorial too...I'm aware that there's maybe a problem of some kind brewing, but also that kids need something to do...and it makes no sense for a newspaper to offer an opinion when they make no effort to express what the problem is!
»

My community garden plot is

Submitted by doretta on May 17, 2007 - 12:43am.
My community garden plot is right in the middle of McCoy Park so I spent a lot of time there last summer and I followed this issue pretty closely. The biggest problems there last year were vandalism and kids getting into fights. I never saw a group last year that looked like more than about 100 kids, the numbers look to be considerably larger this year with a lot more people moving into New Columbia. Roving groups of kids were an issue in many parts of North and NE Portland--on transit, in restaurants, on the street and at private parties--not just in McCoy Park. Some of the issue is just that when you get a couple of hundred kids moving around together even if they aren't doing anything but hanging out the sheer size of the group tends to create an effect a lot like a swarm of locusts descending. Things get trampled and broken, a lot of litter gets left behind, and other people feel intimidated. It doesn't take very many people bent on causing trouble for the issues to get much more serious and the potential for someone, maybe a lot of someones, getting hurt is uncomfortably high. For example, we've had entirely too many incidents of shots being fired in public places the last couple of summers. Police responding to one such incident in front of our Fred Meyer reportedly found 19 empty shell casings. The guys involved turned out to be lousy shots and no one was hurt but imagine if that little shootout had happened in the middle of a group of several hundred kids. At the rate that fights break out in these groups now, I'd rate that as a very serious concern.
»

Thanks, this information

Submitted by Amanda Fritz on May 17, 2007 - 7:43am.
Thanks, this information makes the problem more real and the Editorial more understandable to me.
»

People ARE looking at

Submitted by doretta on May 17, 2007 - 11:08am.
People ARE looking at causes, by the way, I don't see any lack of willingness there at all. There clearly aren't enough resources to eliminate all the causes and some of them are systemic and not solvable in the short term but the police, the DA, ONI crime prevention and community partners are tackling as much of it as they can find leverage to tackle and continuing to look for other things they can do. One of the things many people are putting a lot of energy into is providing alternative activities for kids to get involved in. The curfew thing is intended to give parents both incentive and tools to do better at being connected enough to their kids to be some of those adults who know what is going on. When 12, 13 and 14-year-olds are out after curfew on a regluar basis *something* needs fixing. If there is a problem with adults understanding what it's like to be a kid I think it's not so much those who don't remember what it was like for them as those who don't understand that the world all kids, but particularly poor kids, live in today is quite a bit different from the one they grew up in.
»

On the issue of the term

Submitted by doretta on May 17, 2007 - 11:22am.
On the issue of the term "flash mob", I think the purists have already lost on this one. The term is rapidly evolving to mean any largish group of people that coalesces on short notice primarily via the miracle of cell phones and text messaging. Whether or not it's for the purpose of doing something interesting is evidently too subtle a point.
»
Home » Blogs » Amanda Fritz's blog