It was a Friday afternoon in Christchurch, back in 2019, when everything changed. People were just heading to prayer. Then, the unthinkable happened. A lone gunman walked into the Al Noor Mosque and later the Linwood Islamic Centre, carrying out an attack that left 51 people dead. But what made this specific tragedy a global digital crisis wasn’t just the act itself—it was the fact that he livestreamed the whole thing on Facebook.
The new zealand mosque shootings video became a weapon of its own. It wasn't just a recording; it was a 17-minute piece of footage designed to go viral, to radicalize, and to cause maximum trauma. Honestly, the speed at which it spread was terrifying. Even today, years later, the legal and ethical ripples of that video are still being felt across the internet and in New Zealand's courtrooms.
Why the video is legally "Objectionable"
In New Zealand, they don't mess around with this stuff. The Chief Censor, David Shanks, didn't just suggest people not watch it—he officially classified the footage as "objectionable." That’s a heavy legal term. Basically, it means the video is in the same legal category as child exploitation material.
If you're caught with it in New Zealand, you're not just looking at a slap on the wrist. You're looking at serious jail time. We're talking up to 14 years for sharing it. Even just having a copy on your phone can land you in front of a judge. A businessman named Philip Arps actually got 21 months in prison just for sharing the clip.
The Logic Behind the Ban
Some people argue about free speech. They say we should be allowed to see the "truth." But the New Zealand government saw it differently. They argued the video was:
📖 Related: Why Fox Has a Problem: The Identity Crisis at the Top of Cable News
- A Recruitment Tool: It was literally made to inspire other extremists.
- Revictimization: Imagine being a survivor and seeing your worst moment turned into a "kill count" meme.
- Instructional: It showed tactics that could be copied by others.
The Office of Film and Literature Classification was very clear: this wasn't news. It was propaganda.
The Social Media Chaos
When the livestream started, Facebook’s AI was basically asleep at the wheel. It took 17 minutes for them to pull the plug, but by then, the damage was done. The video was already being ripped and re-uploaded to YouTube, Twitter, and 8chan.
YouTube executives later admitted they were fighting a losing battle. They were taking down uploads as fast as one per second. Think about that. One every single second. People were editing the footage, adding watermarks, or turning it into animations just to trick the automated filters. It was a digital game of whack-a-mole that the platforms were losing.
Eventually, this led to the "Christchurch Call." This was a huge deal. Former Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and French President Emmanuel Macron got together with tech giants to try and figure out how to stop this from ever happening again. It’s the reason why, nowadays, you’ll see "emergency protocols" on social media when a major event breaks out.
👉 See also: The CIA Stars on the Wall: What the Memorial Really Represents
What Most People Get Wrong
There’s a common misconception that the ban was about "hiding" the tragedy. It wasn't. The Royal Commission of Inquiry published a massive report—nearly 800 pages—detailing exactly what went wrong, including the failures of the intelligence services. The facts are out there. The ban is specifically on the visual glorification of the murder.
Another weird myth is that you can watch "news-safe" versions. In NZ, the Department of Internal Affairs even warned news outlets that their edits might be illegal. If it shows the violence, it’s a no-go.
The Impact on Global Law
This event changed the internet forever. Before 2019, platforms like Facebook and YouTube mostly self-regulated. After the new zealand mosque shootings video went viral, governments realized they couldn't trust "big tech" to police themselves.
The UK passed the Online Safety Act. Australia passed laws with massive fines for companies that don't remove "abhorrent violent material" quickly. Even the European Union stepped in with a one-hour rule for removing terrorist content.
✨ Don't miss: Passive Resistance Explained: Why It Is Way More Than Just Standing Still
Real-World Consequences for Sharers
It wasn't just Philip Arps who got in trouble. Several people across New Zealand were arrested in the weeks following the attack.
- A 19-year-old was charged for sharing the link on social media.
- A 44-year-old woman was investigated for having the video on her device.
- Overseas, people were fired from their jobs or arrested in countries like the UK and UAE for praising the footage online.
How to Handle This Safely
If you ever come across this video or links claiming to show it, the best thing you can do is report it. Don't click it. Don't "just check" to see if it's real. Most of the time, links claiming to show the footage are actually malware or "screamers" designed to infect your computer anyway.
Actionable Steps
- Report immediately: If you see a version of the new zealand mosque shootings video on any platform, use the "Report" button and select "Terrorism" or "Graphic Violence."
- Delete and Purge: If you accidentally downloaded a file or received one in a group chat, delete it immediately. Don't forward it to "show how bad it is."
- Support Victims: If you want to engage with the event, read the official Royal Commission report or support organizations like the Federation of Islamic Associations of New Zealand (FIANZ).
- Educate Others: Many people don't realize that possessing this specific video is a crime in many jurisdictions. If a friend mentions having it, let them know the risks.
The tragedy in Christchurch was a moment of profound grief for New Zealand. The video was intended to deepen that wound. By refusing to watch or share it, you're essentially denying the shooter the one thing he wanted: an audience.