Katie, would you put a sock in it please?

[dropcap]B[/dropcap]ig Brother is watching you. In a very Orwellian turn of events, tweets from Katie Hopkins last week sparked enough outrage on Twitter to prompt a police investigation. Her tweets were directed at the nurse who contracted Ebola describing her as a “sweaty Glaswegian” and accusing the Scots of sending “Ebola bombs” to England.

A flurry of discussion followed about whether the police should be involved in such a trivial matter and if her comments were within her rights to freedom of speech. The publicity of the event escalated when Adam Hill’s subsequent rant about Katie Hopkins and her comments went viral on social media several days later garnering thousands of views.

The whole situation is slightly farcical. The tweets were in bad taste and mildly offensive to everyone
except the nurse in question (who definitely has more important things to worry about than Katie Hopkins slandering her).

However, the extent of the response online and the reaction of the police goes only to show the power of social media in making headlines from trivial stories and trivial people.

Yes, Katie Hopkins is entitled to her opinion. That is how free speech works. Her comments were not outrageous, nor offensive enough for investigation. The important question is why people listened to her view as much as they did. I, for one, have absolutely no interest in what she has to say. People being offended by the offhand comments of one of our political leaders is one thing, reacting furiously to a tweet from a former Apprentice star and columnist at the Sun newspaper is quite another.

It is political correctness gone mad and another example of the British public’s fascination with the opinions of those least qualified to give one. She is not alone in shamelessly attracting public attention around a TV personality she has created. Others such as Russell Brand have done similar things, baying to the public’s need for quirky, strong personalities online. It is a shame that it takes Russell Brand to make people listen to points of view that experts in their fields having been making for at least a decade. Maybe they are both just a reflection of the type of news Britain reads online.

Our interest in serious issues is fleeting and only comes to the fore when famous celebrities voice them.

Opinion then becomes viral due to the speed at which it can be rapidly disseminated via social media. These incidents are also not matters for the police. There is real racial hate out there; religious preachers issuing radical strands of their respective religions. The police should focus on real issues rather than pandering to brief social media trends or over-thetop spurts of outrage. We complain about stretched public finances and the investigation of this particular incident is a waste of time.

I think we are in danger of falling into a state where those in the spotlight are followed endlessly, comments on social media are taken out of context, and individuals are lambasted for any slip of the tongue. Let us allow prominent celebrities and sports stars the benefit of the doubt, and choose to ignore those whose fame derives solely from attempts to incite outrage and offense. This is why as Katie Hopkins stars on the current series of Celebrity Big Brother I will not be tuning in.