I think there's definitely a conversation to be had around online hate mobs, or whatever you want to call them. There's a difference between wanting to expose offenders and sheer abuse, death threats etc. But as an angle here to gain a little sympathy for some of the rioters, it was probably misplaced, and really done a disserve due to not being unpacked properly. That said I do think overall the producers played it pretty straight - I don't think there was a clear goal to make us feel sorry for these people, nor to vilify them.
Probably the doc was also hurt by the fact that, predictably, the rioters who agreed to be interviewed seemed pretty low level in terms of what they personally did. Made their stories less interesting and less insightful. Actually the most interesting guy was the one who'd taken part in the '94 riots and been imprisoned for it. His reflections were more meaningful, and he was able to contrast what he did with what he saw 17 years later.
I agree that it would have been more interesting to delve into the sporting side more, and would have played more to ESPN's strengths. What do the riots say about the nature of sports fandom in Vancouver, or even in Canada more broadly? Is there anything about hockey and its associated culture particularly that has an influence? What did fans and players, both then and now, as you say, think of it all?
Given I work in law enforcement, I'd have been interested to hear more on that aspect too. They touched on it a little bit, but there was definitely more to be said about why crowds that big were allowed to gather without sufficient crowd management practices in place (would never happen now) and why the police response seemed so slow, inadequate and poorly planned, especially given the city's history and the obvious level of emotional investment in the game. And why Vancouver? It's probably one of the last big cities in North America you'd expect this sort of thing to happen in.
For all that, as I said, thought the doco was ok and not without merit and food for thought. Just underwhelming and probably never really clear on what it wanted to say.
Many excellent points.
Absolutely cyber-bullying is an issue, as it is appalling what some will do behind the anonymity of a keyboard. Even at a site such as this, I'm sure the mods could regale us with unbelievable stories.
I post videos just for fun - me jumping rope, playing guitar, juggling, etc. Last year I dabbled with YouTube Shorts, and one jump rope video found its way into the algorithm. It got lots of hits, which initially had me surprised and happy; until I checked my notifications.
With lots of hits came lots of comments, many of which were extremely ugly. They actually gave me anxiety, and I even worried about my safety. Out of curiosity, I clicked on the channels of some of my "haters," and of course all were completely anonymous, with no content of their own.
And we've seen athletes including Mitch Marner and Jacob Trouba express dismay over social media posts.
So yes, online harassment is a legitimate concern.
My instinct as a small businessman is, rioters know if they were to vandalize a store or flip a police car on an ordinary day, they'd be arrested immediately. But during a riot, they feel they can get away with since everyone else is doing it. And they get brazen and film themselves.
The attitude of some online is to fight back, and not let them get away with it.
I wish they would have covered the issues you mentioned, too. I've wondered:
Did the incendiary nature of the series play a part? The '94 Canucks were a likable group, yet riots still occurred. On the other hand, Mark Recchi said the '11 Canucks squad was the most arrogant team he ever faced. And we all remember Alex Burrows, Aaron Rome, etc.
The Olympics were held in the same building the previous year, and there were large crowds; but Canada won. So I don't know.
I agree Vancouver seemed an unlikely place. It is picturesque, and by all accounts a friendly city with a great standard of living.
