The Christchurch Shootings: Terror goes Viral
An Old Spectre with a New Face
Although far-right terror is nothing new, from the Contras of Nicaragua, Klu Klux Klan and the 1995 Oklahoma City Bombings to the brutalities of fascist and Nazi regimes, right-wing terrorism is evolving.
‘Alt-right’ extremism has surged in the West. The internet is a key driver for this boom, in addition to the parallel ‘rise of the right’ in mainstream politics around the globe. Vibrant communities on mainstream social media, as well as bespoke echo-chambers like Stormfront, Voat, Gab and 8Chan, provide a bubbling cauldron for alt-right ideology and hate speech to brew and spill over. What’s more, violence and terrorist attacks carried out by ideological adherents in this global and diffused network have increased.
The Christchurch Shootings thunderously echoed the need to pay careful attention to the threat of alt-right extremism. In particular, the cyber dimensions of terrorism before, during and after attacks. This article will unpack what Christchurch shows us about alt-right online culture and the challenges for counter-terrorism in the digital age.
Before
A notable trend of alt-right terror has been to state their motives and targets online prior to attacks. Before the Pittsburgh Synagogue Shooting and others like it, perpetrators posted their intent to harm prior to attacking. With the benefit of hindsight, it is easy to say that the publication of the Christchurch Shooter’s manifesto on 8Chan should provide advance warning to law enforcement.
Despite the explosion of openly accessible data, the difficulty for law enforcement is sorting through the haystack to determine which threats to take seriously. This is particularly the case in alt-right online culture. Their widespread use of trolling and spam tactics coupled with an ever-changing nomenclature based on irony, innuendo and codes makes threat detection and assessment a major difficulty.
During
Another key issue to resurface is containing the spread of terrorist content on social media. Whether for publicity, internal communications or recruitment, extremist groups and individuals have capitalised on the wealth of opportunities social media has to offer.
Although videos capturing the moments of terrorist attacks are common, these are typically filmed from the perspectives of victims or bystanders. What distinguishes Christchurch is that the shooter live-streamed one of the mosque attacks to Facebook. The 17 minute video filmed from a body-mounted GoPro, stylistically reminiscent of a first-person videogame shooter, was flagged 12 minutes after the stream ended. By then, it had been viewed over 4,000 times.
The footage of the massacre went viral on social media channels. Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Reddit among others faced struggled to identify and remove millions of replicated videos from their sites. Uploaders were able to exploit weaknesses in current automatic detection software and bypass these systems by making minor edits to the original footage.
After
As I discussed in my last article on this topic, terrorism is the tactical use of violence against victims to influence third parties. This means that it feeds off public attention to be effective. As a result, the communication strategies employed after attacks are critical to the success of counter-terrorist efforts. The approach of the New Zealand government and many news agencies was to anonymise the perpetrator of the attacks while amplifying social solidarity and the experiences of victims. This strategy has gone some way in dampening his public profile.
However, many public figures and media outlets were either baited or purposefully capitalized on the massacre. In addition to Erdogan and Daily Mail showing the video for cynically self-serving purposes, portions of the attacker’s manifesto have been widely published in print and online. While the manifesto undoubtedly contains useful insights into the attacker’s motives, large portions draw on trolling and meme culture. It is very likely that this was a deliberate strategy to bait public discourse and gain greater engagement and exposure. As Mr. Mohan, chief product officer for YouTube, stated in an interview with The Washington Post, ‘this was a tragedy that was almost designed for the purpose of going viral’.
Where we go next
With terrorists weaponising the cybersphere evermore effectively since ISIS’ e-propaganda campaigns made its debut, the Christchurch Shootings edge us another step towards understanding why and how terror goes viral. It will also change how terror is responded to online.
Policing of social media is likely to increase, especially on alt-right sites and chat rooms. New Zealand is currently charging a number of individuals who shared the videos of the attacks on social media. Leaked documents have indicated the UK government is considering holding social media CEOs personally accountable for extremist content on their sites. Most major social media platforms have also announced moves towards increasing content moderation and enhancing automated detection and filtering of harmful content.
Offline, the Christchurch shootings illustrate the importance of strengthening linkages between governments, law enforcement, private sector and wider society to effectively respond to crises like these. Importantly, deploying communication strategies that dampen rather than publicise terrorist messages avoids playing into the hands of perpetrators and blunts a key weapon in the arsenal of terror.
