Internet service providers block video game inspired by terrorist attack

Friday, 1 November 2019

Vodafone and Spark have blocked a site selling a March 15-inspired video game.

Some of the country's biggest telecommunications providers are blocking access to a website selling a video game inspired by the March 15 terror attack.

The game puts the player in the role of the person who opened fire in two Christchurch mosques, killing 51 people.

Chief Censor David Shanks on Thursday classified the game as objectionable under the Films, Videos & Publications Classification Act 1993, along with a document reportedly shared by the antisemitic shooter who killed two people in Halle, Germany, on October 9.

The attack in Halle was a copycat of the attack in New Zealand; both were broadcast live on social media along with related hate-filled documents described as manifestos. Both videos and manifestos are now illegal.

* Chief Censor David Shanks says an entirely new media regulator may be needed

* Chief Censor bans livestream of antisemitic shooting in Halle, Germany**

On Friday, Vodafone and Spark confirmed they had blocked access by their customers to the website selling the banned game.

Chief Censor David Shanks has banned video recordings of two terror attacks this year.

They were among multiple internet service providers (ISPs) who took the unprecedented step to block access to sites promoting extremist content following March 15. (In an open letter at the time, the chief executives of Spark, Vodafone, and 2degrees said they believed it was the right thing to do in such extreme and tragic circumstances.)

Vodafone New Zealand's head of external affairs Rich Llewellyn said the company didn't believe it was appropriate for ISPs to decide what customers could access.

'However in this new instance, as the Chief Censor has classified the content of a video game as objectionable and as this game is clearly seeking to exploit the Christchurch attacks, we will block the site that is selling this hateful game.'

He acknowledged the move was only a temporary solution to a bigger problem. 'We urge the Government to speed up the current process underway to develop a broader and more formal framework to address extremist content online.'

In a statement, Spark said it was also reluctant to take on the role of 'unilaterally censoring what our customers can or can't access online'.

'We are supportive in principle of the Government's intention to introduce and administer a filter system for terrorist and violent extremist content, similar to what is already in place for child exploitation content. We want to work with appropriate arms of Government, the wider industry and civil society organisations to make the internet a better place for New Zealanders.

'While our strong preference is for a Government-led response to be put in place as soon as possible, in the absence of this we have been prepared to take extraordinary action in extreme circumstances where there is a clear, compelling case.'

Shanks told Stuff he had reached out to ISPs to notify them of this classification and to ask they consider steps to protect customers from illegal content.

'That's as far as it went in terms of my advice,' he said.

'We had a look at the site promoting and selling [the banned game] and we saw it had other, similar publications on it. It was presenting as, essentially, a terrorist promotional, extremist site. That's a different category, at least in my mind, from just an isolated publication that might be appearing in different ways and guises on the internet. This is an identifiable platform.'

In September, InternetNZ published a report addressing technical and policy considerations of internet filtering.

The report warned filtering could cause 'collateral damage' by blocking access to legitimate content, threaten privacy rights (blocking may require mass surveillance), and also limit users' freedom to find, use, and share information online.

The Department of Internal Affairs is leading work on a 'crisis playbook' to ensure more considered approaches towards internet filtering in the future.

Director of digital safety Jolene Armadoros said DIA didn't advise ISPs to take action. 'This is a decision they have made about a piece of illegal content.

'We are supportive of steps taken by companies to reduce the risk of harm from objectionable content.'