Several websites including 4chan have been blocked by major Australian telcos for continuing to host footage of the Christchurch terrorist attack.

Telstra yesterday blocked access to 4chan , 8chan and Voat, the blog Zerohedge and video hosting platform Liveleak.

"We understand this may inconvenience some legitimate users of these sites, but these are extreme circumstances and we feel this is the right thing to do," Telstra networks and IT executive Nikos Katinakis said in a statement.

Optus and Vodafone declined to name which domains they blocked but the same platforms also failed to load on their networks on Tuesday afternoon.

The ban on 4chan was lifted a few hours later.

A Muslim worshiper prays at a makeshift memorial at the Al Noor Mosque. (AAP)

Vodafone said while blocking requests normally came from the courts or law enforcement agencies "this was an extreme case which we think requires an extraordinary response".

"While there were discussions at an industry level about this issue, this is a decision Vodafone Australia came to independently," a spokeswoman said in a statement.

Optus said it had blocked the domains after "reflecting on community expectations".

The telco industry's peak body said the decision to voluntarily block domains was made due to the "extraordinary circumstances" involved.

"These ISPs have sought to balance community expectations to remove access to the video with the need to minimise any inconvenience that may arise from legitimate content being blocked as an unavoidable, temporary consequence," Communications Alliance chief executive John Stanton said in a statement.

Another large internet service provider, TPG, has been contacted for comment.

Alleged gunman Brenton Tarrant live-streamed the attack. (Supplied)

A spokesman for the eSafety commissioner said she did not provide "any direction or advice to Australian ISPs in regard to the blocking of websites".

The office does not have the authority to direct ISPs to block domains but can take action to remove content shared on Australian-hosted websites.

The commissioner is encouraging social media users to report the video and any content supporting the attacks directly to the platforms.

LiveLeak said in a statement it would not carry the video filmed by "the psychopath who murdered 49 innocent people in New Zealand" and continue to remove it whenever it is discovered.

"Whilst we may carry media showing the most terrible of events we don't want to be a vehicle of choice for those who carry these events out. This is a very important distinction for us," it said.

Voat, ZeroHedge, 4chan and 8chan have been contacted for comment. </s> Pressure is building on Inc. and other social media platforms to stop hosting extremist propaganda including terrorist events, after Friday’s deadly attacks on two mosques in New Zealand were live-streamed.

Australia’s prime minister has urged the Group of 20 nations to use a meeting in June to discuss a crack down, while New Zealand media reported the nation’s biggest banks have pulled their advertising from and

“We cannot simply sit back and accept that these platforms just exist and what is said is not the responsibility of the place where they are published,” New Zealand Prime Minister told parliament on Tuesday. “They are the publisher, not just the postman. There cannot be a case of all profit, no responsibility.”

said it had been working directly with and across the technology industry to "help counter hate speech and the threat of terrorism."

The lone shooter accused of killing 50 people in the New Zealand city of live-streamed the murders, with the video continuing to be widely available on a range of platforms hours after the attack. The suspect, an Australian, uploaded his hate-filled manifesto online shortly before launching his assault.

It’s the latest example of social media struggling to keep offensive content from sites that generate billions of dollars in revenue from advertisers -- a problem that’s seen Facebook founder grilled by Congress.

The shooting video was viewed fewer than 200 times during its live broadcast, and no users reported the video during that time, Facebook Vice-President and deputy general counsel Chris Sonderby said in a blog post. It was reported to the company 29 minutes after the video started and viewed 4,000 times before being removed, he said.

The should discuss the issue at its Osaka Summit in June, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison said Tuesday in an open letter to this year’s host, Japan counterpart The group should work to ensure technology firms implement appropriate filtering and remove terrorist-linked content, and show transparency in meeting those requirements, he said.

“It is unacceptable to treat the internet as an ungoverned space,” Morrison said. “It is imperative that the global community works together to ensure that technology firms meet their moral obligation to protect the communities which they serve and from which they profit.”

Ardern’s government will look at the role social media played and what steps it can take, including on the stage. Previously she vowed to seek talks with Facebook, which said it blocked the upload of 1.2 million video clips and removed another 300,000 within 24 hours.

The New Zealand business community is becoming increasingly vocal that the social-media should be rebuked by restricting their bottom line.

The is encouraging advertisers to recognize they have a choice where their advertising dollars are spent and to carefully consider where ads appear.

“We challenge Facebook and other platform owners to immediately take steps to effectively moderate hate content before another tragedy can be streamed online,” the association said in a statement.

Meanwhile, New Zealand’s three biggest broadband providers called on Facebook, Twitter and to join an urgent discussion at an industry and government level to find a solution to the live-streaming and hosting of video footage such as that produced in

“The discussion must start somewhere,” the chief executives of the said in an open letter on their websites Tuesday. “Social media companies and hosting platforms that enable the sharing of user-generated content with the public have a legal duty of care to protect their users and wider society by preventing the uploading and sharing of content such as this video.”

Artificial intelligence techniques could be deployed and, for the most serious types of content, more onerous requirements should apply including taking down the material within a specified period, proactive measures and fines for failure to do so, they said. </s> Australia will fine social media companies up to 10 percent of their annual global turnover and imprison executives for up to three years if violent content is not removed “expeditiously” under a new law passed by the country’s parliament on Thursday.

The new law is in response to a lone gunman attack on two mosques in Christchurch on March 15, killing 50 people as they attended Friday prayers.

The gunman broadcasted his attack live on Facebook and it was widely shared for over an hour before being removed, a timeframe Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison described as unacceptable.

READ MORE: Christchurch shooting video triggers lawsuit against Facebook and YouTube by French Muslim group

Australian Brenton Tarrant, 28, a suspected white supremacist, has been charged with one murder following the attack and was remanded without a plea. He is due back in court on April 5, when police said he was likely to face more charges.

It is now an offense in Australia for companies, such as Facebook Inc and Alphabet’s Google, which owns YouTube, not to remove any videos or photographs that show murder, torture or rape without delay.

Companies must also inform Australian police within a “reasonable” timeframe.

WATCH: New Zealand PM says they’ve attempted to remove video of mosque shootings

“It is important that we make a very clear statement to social media companies that we expect their behavior to change,” Mitch Fifield, Australia’s minister for communications and the arts, told reporters in Canberra.

Juries will decide whether companies have complied with the timetable.

A spokeswoman for Google declined to comment on the legislation specifically, but said the company has already taken action to limit violent content on its platforms.

READ MORE: New Zealand’s inquiry into mosque shootings will look at social media, spy agencies and guns

A spokeswoman for Facebook was not immediately able for comment.

Facebook said last week it was exploring restrictions on who can access their live video-streaming service, depending on factors such as previous violations of the site’s community standards.

Australia’s opposition Labor party backed the legislation, but said it will consult with the technology industry over possible amendments if it wins power at an election due in May.

Australia’s parliament will rise until after the election. The newly elected lawmakers will not sit until at least July.

Critics of the legislation said the government moved too quickly, without proper consultation and consideration.

“Laws formulated as a knee-jerk reaction to a tragic event do not necessarily equate to good legislation and can have myriad unintended consequences,” said Arthur Moses, head of the Australian Law Council. </s> In the wake of the terrorist attack in Christchurch, New Zealand last month, Australia is putting major pressure on Big Tech to prevent the spread of hateful and violent content on their platforms, with a new law that threatens major fines and imprisonment.

The law positions Australia at the extreme end of a growing push to police the digital gatekeepers.

On Thursday, Australia’s parliament passed legislation that carries penalties of up to 10 percent of annual global net sales over the 12 months preceding an offense for the companies, and imprisonment of up to three years for company executives. It is unclear from the legislation which executives would be subjected to the law.

The new Sharing of Abhorrent Violent Material bill requires hosting services and content service providers to notify law enforcement and “expeditiously” remove content that depicts “abhorrent violent conduct,” which the bill defines as terrorist acts, murder, attempted murder, torture, rape, and kidnapping.

The law does not limit its scope to the executives of major corporations like Google or Facebook. Instead, those who run any site or service that fails to remove “abhorrent violent material” from their servers are also subject to potential fines or imprisonment under the law.

The bill was drafted in response to the horrific shooting at two mosques in Christchurch, during which the shooter livestreamed his attack and white supremacist messages on Facebook. After the original livestream was removed, the video rapidly proliferated across the platform as Facebook moderators scrambled to remove hundreds of thousands of re-uploads. The company says it automatically blocked 1.2 million versions while another 300,000 made it past their filters. Videos were also shared on Twitter, Reddit, and YouTube, all of which likewise struggled to contain it.

Australia’s attorney general, Christian Porter, told reporters on Thursday that Twitter and Facebook “should not be playing footage of murder,” according to The Guardian. “There are platforms such as YouTube, Twitter, and Facebook who do not seem to take their responsibility to not show the most abhorrently violent material seriously,” Porter told reporters.

The Guardian reports that Porter explained a jury would have to decide what constitutes an “expeditious” timeframe for removal of offending content, meaning it is not specifically defined by the law. Porter added, “every Australian would agree it was totally unreasonable that it [the Christchurch video] should exist on their [Facebook’s] site for well over an hour without them taking any action whatsoever.”

Digital Industry Group Inc (DIGI), an Australian group that represents Twitter, Google, Facebook, and Amazon, among other tech companies, denounced the new law.

“This law, which was conceived and passed in five days without any meaningful consultation, does nothing to address hate speech, which was the fundamental motivation for the tragic Christchurch terrorist attacks,” DIGI managing director Sunita Bose said, in a statement.

Bose said that DIGI members try to remove abhorrent content as fast as possible. “But with the vast volumes of content uploaded to the internet every second, this is a highly complex problem that requires discussion with the technology industry, legal experts, the media and civil society to get the solution right,” Bose said.

“We have zero tolerance for terrorist content on our platforms,” a Google spokesperson told Gizmodo. “We are committed to leading the way in developing new technologies and standards for identifying and removing terrorist content.”

Facebook and Twitter directed Gizmodo to the statement from DIGI.

In an interview on Good Morning America that aired shortly after the bill was passed, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg rejected calls made after the Christchurch attack to add a delay to livestreams, because it would “fundamentally break what livestreaming is for people.” </s> CHRISTCHURCH: New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern on Sunday said she intends to ask Facebook how the Christchurch gunman, who slaughtered 50 people during Friday prayers, was able to livestream the massacre. Using a GoPro camera, the terrorist broadcast extremely graphic footage of him shooting people at the Al Noor Mosque via Facebook Live. The livestream was available to watch on social media for hours after the attack.

 In a press conference on Sunday, Ardern said the New Zealand Government did its best to take down the video, but its power to do so is limited.

 “We did as much as we could to remove or seek to have removed some of the footage that was being circulated in the aftermath of this terrorist attack. Ultimately, though, it has been up to those platforms to facilitate their removal and support their removal.”

 She indicated disapproval at social media giants such as Facebook for allowing graphic content to be uploaded and shared widely.

 “I do think there are further questions to be answered. Obviously these social media platforms have wide reach,” she said.

 “This is a problem that goes well beyond New Zealand, it has played out in other parts of the world. So whilst we might have seen action taken here, that hasn’t prevented [the footage] being circulated.

 “This is an issue that goes well beyond New Zealand, but it doesn’t mean we can’t play an active role in getting it resolved.”

 Facebook on Sunday said it has removed 1.5 million videos of the shootings “in the first 24 hours” after the attack. “We continue to work around the clock to remove violating content using a combination of technology and people,” Facebook New Zealand’s Mia Garlick said on Twitter.

 Garlick said that, of the removed videos, 1.2 million were “blocked at upload.” “Out of respect for the people affected by this tragedy and the concerns of local authorities, we’re also removing all edited versions of the video that do not show graphic content,” she said.

 During the press conference, Ardern was also asked about the comments made by Australian senator Fraser Anning, who said immigration was to blame for the shooting.

 Anning’s remarks were widely condemned and he was publicly egged by a teenage boy who has since been hailed as a hero. When asked for her reaction to the comments, Ardern was blunt. “They were a disgrace.”

 — dpa/IANS </s> Facebook has finally responded to international outrage following the live streaming of the massacre of worshippers in two Christchurch mosques.

Four days after a gunman went on rampage killing 50 people and injuring dozens of others, Facebook vice president Chris Sonderby defended the platform’s response to the live stream and reassured users it was working to stop hate content being posted on the platform.

He said the live stream had fewer than 200 viewers and more than 1.5 million videos of the massacre were removed or blocked in the 24 hours after the attack.

“We remain shocked and saddened by this tragedy and are committed to working with leaders in New Zealand, other governments, and across the technology industry to help counter hate speech and the threat of terrorism,” he said.

“We continue to work around the clock to prevent this content from appearing on our site, using a combination of technology and people.

“We have been working directly with the New Zealand Police to respond to the attack and support their investigation.

“We removed the attacker’s video within minutes of their outreach to us, and in the aftermath, we have been providing an on-the-ground resource for law enforcement authorities.”

New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern on Sunday said she would raise her concerns directly with Facebook about whether live streaming should be stopped.

The Australian and British governments have joined in increasing pressure on Facebook, Google and Youtube to act swiftly on terrorist content being shared on their platforms.

Mr Sonderby said New Zealand police had asked that some details of the response to broadcast not be released, but he revealed details about the action Facebook took when it became aware a terrorist attack had been live streamed.

He said no Facebook users reported the video during the live broadcast, which was viewed fewer than 200 times.

He said the first user report was made 12 minutes after the broadcast ended.

The original Facebook Live video was removed and the personal accounts of the shooting suspect were removed, Mr Sonderby said.

“In the first 24 hours, we removed about 1.5 million videos of the attack globally,” he said.

“More than 1.2 million of those videos were blocked at upload, and were therefore prevented from being seen on our services.

“This incident highlights the importance of industry cooperation regarding the range of terrorists and violent extremists operating online.” </s> Labor supports legislation in response to Christchurch shooting that threatens jail for executives, despite media companies’ concerns

This article is more than 5 months old

This article is more than 5 months old

The Australian parliament has passed legislation to crack down on violent videos on social media, despite furious reaction from the tech industry, media companies and legal experts.

The Labor opposition combined with the ruling Liberal-National Coalition to pass the law on Thursday, despite warning it won’t allow prosecution of social media executives as promised by the government. Tech giants expressed the opposite concern that it may criminalise anyone in their companies for a failure to remove violent material.

The bill, described the attorney general, Christian Porter, as “most likely a world first”, was drafted in the wake of the Christchurch terrorist attack, when video of the alleged perpetrator’s violent attack spread on social media faster than it could be removed.

On Thursday Porter said Facebook and Twitter “should not be playing footage of murder”, in the same way that commercial television stations would not show it.

“There are platforms such as YouTube, Twitter and Facebook who do not seem to take their responsibility to not show the most abhorrently violent material seriously,” he told reporters in Canberra.

Government can’t regulate Facebook – it’s up to all of us | Carys Afoko Read more

The Sharing of Abhorrent Violent Material bill creates new offences for content service providers and hosting services that fail to notify the Australian federal police about or fail to expeditiously remove videos depicting “abhorrent violent conduct”. That conduct is defined as videos depicting terrorist acts, murders, attempted murders, torture, rape or kidnap.

The bill creates a regime for the eSafety Commissioner to notify social media companies that they are deemed to be aware they are hosting abhorrent violent material, triggering an obligation to take it down.

Porter said a “reasonable” or “expeditious” timeframe would depend on the circumstances and be up to a jury to decide, but “every Australian would agree it was totally unreasonable that it should exist on their site for well over an hour without them taking any action whatsoever”.

“This law would prevent that and criminalise that and offer the government an ability to respond where an organisation like Facebook let something livestream and play for a long time on their platform.”

The Digital Industry Group, which represents Google, Facebook, Twitter, Amazon and Verizon Media in Australia, has warned the bill was passed without meaningful consultation and threatens penalties against tech companies for content created by users.

Labor has promised to review the legislation if it is elected in May, adding to a list of national security laws it will have to revisit in government after supporting in opposition, including the encryption bill which it has promised to amend.

The group’s managing director, Sunita Bose, said members worked to take down abhorrent conduct “as quickly as possible”, but “with the vast volumes of content uploaded to the internet every second, this is a highly complex problem”.

“This �?pass it now, change it later’ approach to legislation, such as we saw with the encryption law, creates immediate uncertainty for Australia’s technology industry,” she said.

“It threatens employees within any company that has user-generated content to be potentially jailed for the misuse of their services – even if they are unaware of it.

Mark Zuckerberg calls for stronger regulation of internet Read more

The chief executive of Atlassian, Scott Farquhar, said that no one wanted abhorrent violent material on the internet but “the legislation is flawed and will unnecessarily cost jobs and damage our tech industry”.

“The current legislation means that anyone working for a company that allows user generated content could potentially go to jail for [three] years,” he said.

“As written, that applies to news sites, social media sites, dating sites, job sites – anywhere user content could be created.”

Farquhar complained that the legislation failed to define how “expeditiously” violent material must be removed, and did not define who in a social media company could be punished.

Scott Farquhar (@scottfarkas) If the material in question is uploaded and you don’t take it down “expeditiously”, you can go to jail. What is expeditiously? Not defined! “Who” in a company? Not defined!

Corporate penalties range up to $10.5m or 10% of annual turnover, but Labor believes these provisions fail to pierce the corporate veil and punish executives for the actions of others in the company.

Penalties for individuals who “provide a hosting service” and fail to remove material can be up to three years imprisonment or a $2.1m fine, or both.

On Monday Labor warned these penalties would not apply to executives of social media companies because giants such as Facebook and Twitter – not the individuals themselves – provide the service.

Porter responded to those concerns on Thursday by noting the government had received advice that some services such as 4Chan and 8Chan had “individuals who were responsible for those platforms”, who could be charged.

“Even with respect to larger platforms such as Facebook, such as YouTube, there could well be instances where an individual is so complicit with the reckless availability of abhorrent violent material that they would be individually liable.”

The Law Council of Australia president, Arthur Moses, said criminalising social media companies and executives was a “serious step” and should not be legislated as a “knee-jerk reaction to a tragic event” because of the potential for unintended consequences.

A spokeswoman for News Corp Australia said making digital platforms liable for what they made available to the world was overdue, but the bill went beyond this.

“While we have worked with the government to try to minimise the impact, this law risks criminalising news reporting and provides significant powers to the eSafety Commissioner to take down news content,” she said.

The bill includes defences for public interest journalism. But the chief executive of the Media Entertaining and Arts Alliance, Paul Murphy, said it had “concerns that the legislation is being rushed in such a complex area without proper consideration to ensure it does not impinge on media freedom”. </s> Brenton Tarrant is lad into the dock for his court appearance.

Brenton Tarrant is lad into the dock for his court appearance.

ACCUSED Australian gunman Brenton Tarrant is being denied access to newspapers, television and radio while being held in confinement.

The New Zealand Herald is reporting that the NSW-born alleged killer has been moved from Christchurch to the country's only maximum security prison in Auckland.

The 28-year-old is believed to be under 24-hour surveillance and no visitors have been approved to see him.

The prison has been described as holding the most "complex, volatile and dangerous" men.

It is not known whether he will be flown back to Christchurch for his next court appearance next month or appear via audio visual link.

The news came as social media companies were slammed in New Zealand's parliament for being "all profit no responsibility" as horrific footage of alleged gunman Brenton Tarrant's shooting rampage continues to be posted.

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern also told parliament she would never utter the alleged Australian gunman's name in public because he did not deserve the notoriety.

In her address, which received applause from both sides of the House, Ms Ardern said what role social played in the massacre of 50 worshippers at two Christchurch mosques last Friday would be looked at.

She said language and division of hate had existed for decades but the tools to carry them were new.

"We cannot simply sit back and accept these platforms just exist and that what is said on them is not the responsibility of the place where they are published," she said.

"They are the publisher not just the postman. They cannot be the case all profit no

Outside parliament she said she had already spoken with British Prime Minister Theresa May about Facebook in particular as the issue of its continued publishing of the rampage footage was a global problem not a Kiwi one.

"We agreed that globally efforts need to be made … we really need a global alliance to deal with some of these issues," she said.

She said she had also spoken with Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison about the problem and made clear to Facebook's chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg it was "unacceptable" footage continued to exist today.

"It's our view that it cannot, should not be distributed, available, able to be viewed, it is horrendous and while they have given us those assurances, ultimately responsibility sits with them," she said.

Australia's three largest telcos began blocking customers from more than 40 websites suspected of hosting distressing footage from the terrorist attack.

Telstra, Optus, and Vodafone banned users accessing the websites despite the lack of a court order, with Vodafone revealing the decision came after "industry discussions".

It's understood the ban extends to 45 websites in total, including 8chan - the site where alleged Christchurch mosque shooter uploaded his "manifesto" - and others including 4chan, Best Gore, Death Addict, Kiwi Farms, Lulz, and Zero Hedge.

The effort has been co-ordinated by industry group Communications Alliance, even though it has warned against laws forcing internet service providers to block websites in the past, in case they "hamper legitimate activities and disadvantage consumers".

The internet service providers did not clarify how long the temporary block would remain in place.

It came as it was revealed the American operator of a message board website has refused New Zealand police requests for data related to its posting of Tarrant's alleged 73-page manifesto to kill.

In an obscenity-laden abusive post, Kiwi Farms founder Joshua Moon said New Zealand was a "small irrelevant island nation" and a "sh*thole country" and he would not help authorities.

"Tell your superiors they're going to make the entire country and its government look like clowns by trying to censor the internet," he told the police officer who made the request for help.

While Facebook has so far removed more than 1.5 million videos from their platform, others such as Kiwi Farms have not.

Meanwhile, Ms Ardern said she would never speak the name of the 28-year-old alleged gunman Tarrant.

"He sought many things from his act of terror, but one was notoriety and that is why you will never hear me mention his name," she said.

"He is a terrorist, he is a criminal, he is an extremist but he will when I speak be nameless. To others I implore you speak the names of those who are lost rather than the name of the man who took them. He may have sought notoriety but we in New Zealand will give him nothing, not even his name."

US TV host Stephen Colbert has cancelled an unexpected Late Show visit to New Zealand in the wake of a terrorist attack that killed 50 people.

Colbert said it was not the time to distract from the gravity of the events that unfolded last Friday.

"I just love that country," Colbert said.

"If you've never been, go. The people there are unbelievably kind and welcoming. Obviously, we're not going to go down now but we hope to go down in the future and again, we want to say to everyone down there how sad and heartbroken we are for what that country is going through.

"For one of the hallmarks of New Zealand and one of the things I have always thought of, is it's this wonderful, isolated country so far away from the problems we take for granted here north of the equator.

"And now this very particular brand of evil has infected that country like a ghost, something you wouldn't imagine.

"Truly, an evil creature has arrived on that island. I pray with all my heart that they take action down there and have the courage to take action that we seem to lack up here in the United States. Good luck to them and blessings and peace to the Muslim community there and everywhere in the world."

Colbert's plan took shape after Jacinda Ardern appeared on the show last September, inviting the star to visit New Zealand.

Autopsies have been completed on all 50 victims of the Christchurch terror attacks, reports the New Zealand Herald.

In a statement, police said 12 victims had been officially identified and six of those have now been released to their families.

"Police are acutely aware of frustrations by families associated with the length of time required for the identification process following Friday's terror attack," the police statement said.

"While identification may seem straightforward the reality is much more complex, particularly in a situation like this.

"Our absolute priority is to get this right and ensure that no mistakes are made.

"We are doing all we can to undertake this work as quickly as possible and return the victims to their loved ones."

Families of the dead have been left frustrated as they wait for their loved ones' bodies to be returned to them.

Islamic religious law usually calls for the body to be washed and shrouded before being buried within 24 hours of death.

A senior member of ISIS has called for revenge after in the wake of the Christchurch attack.

The terrorist organisation's spokesman Abu Hassan al-Muhajir has reportedly issued an appeal in a 44-minute audio recording.

The New York Times reported that al-Muhajir broke six months of silence to call for retaliation.

"The scenes of the massacres in the two mosques should wake up those who were fooled, and should incite the supporters of the caliphate to avenge their religion," he said.

Al-Muhajir compared the massacre to the ongoing battle in Baghuz, ISIS' only remaining piece of territory in Syria.

"Here is Baghuz in Syria, where Muslims are burned to death and are bombed by all known and unknown weapons of mass destruction," he said.

But The New York Times reported that officials believe those killed in Baghuz are mostly Islamic State fighters or their wives and children. </s> Facebook removed 1.5 million videos of the mass shootings at two mosques in New Zealand in the day after the attack Friday.

Mia Garlick, director of policy for Facebook New Zealand, issued a statement saying that Facebook removed 1.5 million videos of the shooting, including 1.2 million that were blocked at upload, in the first 24 hours after the attack.

Garlick did not specify the reason why 20 percent of the videos were not blocked at upload.

"Out of respect for the people affected by this tragedy and the concerns of local authorities, we're also removing all edited versions of the video that do not show graphic content," she added.

The accused shooter, who has since appeared in court, live streamed the attack at two mosques in the city of Christchurch on Friday in which 50 people were killed and 36 were hospitalized as of Saturday.

Facebook said police alerted it to a video of the shooting on the platform shortly after the shooter started the live stream his Facebook profile. The social media giant said it "quickly removed both the shooter's Facebook and Instagram accounts and the video."

Garlick said Facebook will also remove "any praise or support for the crime and the shooter or shooters as we're aware."

"We will continue working directly with New Zealand Police as their response and investigation continues," she said.

New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said that there were "further questions to be answered" by Facebook and other social media sites, regarding their response to the events surrounding the shooting.

On Sunday, New Zealand's government informed Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and other online platforms that sharing any version of the footage, including those edited to remove graphic content, is a violation of the law.

Ardern said New Zealand did as much as it could do to "remove or seek to have removed some of the footage" but the primary task of preventing the spread of the videos was "up to those platforms."

This article has been adapted from its original source.
Telstra blocks access to several websites in Australia for hosting footage of the recent mass shootings in Christchurch, New Zealand, which were livestreamed on Facebook, including LiveLeak, 4chan, 8chan, Voat and the blog Zero Hedge. Optus and Vodafone took similar actions but did not list which sites had been blocked.