An evil man taps send as he uploads his manifesto to the internet. He presses play on his GoPro, streaming video to Facebook. Filled with a wretched heart the man drives to a mosque. He picks up his gun and kills 42 people. Six minutes later, he drives to another mosque. The shooter fires at two individuals along the way. The man then arrives at his second target and kills seven more. The attacker flees for some unknown reason. He is arrested shortly afterward by police.

What you just read is not a normal mass shooting. The results seem the same. Politicians on both side of the aisle, nationally in New Zealand and internationally, have begun to talk about gun control again. This conversation is renewed with a seemingly intense fervor. Social media is abuzz with hashtags and political flame wars. World leaders serve up another round of condolences and condemnations to respective parties. There is just one problem… the shooter won.

The shooter designed this massacre to be spread by social media. The murder was live-streamed to Facebook. The disgusting manifesto entitled “The Great Replacement” was posted to internet forums and spread like wildfire across other internet forums. Inside this manifesto, the shooter detailed exactly who he was, his views on specific issues. Most importantly, the shooter articulates how he went about crafting his diabolical act of terror we now know as the Christchurch shooting.

I forced myself to read through all 72 pages of the killer’s manifesto. Inside the depraved and disjointed document, the self-proclaimed eco-fascist details that he chose to use guns specifically because it would stir up the gun debate internationally. His extensive use of copypastas and other memes such as “Subscribe to PewDiePie” as well as much of what he articulates in his manifesto, shows that this man understood the inner workings of internet culture and how it’s power can help spread his interests.

The media does not seem to understand this. It seems like they haven’t even read the manifesto. I cannot blame them, as reading the manifesto made me sick that people like the shooter exist in the world. However, this does not excuse outlets that are supposed to report the truth to espouse untruths, especially when facts are critical, news cycle be damned. For example, many pundits and analysts of various news networks associated the man as a conservative extremist despite the fact the shooter specifically states in his manifesto that “conservatism is corporatism in disguise, [he wants] no part of it.” These statements, intentional or by accident, will certainly isolate many center-right individuals as the message dissipates to the public and possibly push many further towards the shooter’s ideology. These are among some of the many intended effects the shooter planned for.

Scarier still is that this manifesto acted like divination. Within 24 hours, the New Zealand government drafted a bill for further gun control in the nation. News networks and social media around the world brought the massacre into the public eye with the shooter’s ideology in tow. The white supremacist ideology once again is being discussed in public discourse. All as the shooter predicted.

There is a way to prevent this all, however. It starts with skepticism and seeking information beyond your own circle of information. It is unsavory, and I hesitate to write this, but I would encourage (cautiously) that you read the document. Like I said in my earlier article, I believe that the best way to argue against disgusting ideas is not to outlaw the document and video of the massacre as New Zealand has done. Rather I believe that we must be reminded that evil still exists in this world and the best way to argue against it is to understand the root of the evil. This will give you an understanding as to the shooter’s mindset and the malice associated. In addition, reading the document will also give you a better detection of mistakes politicians and the media present regarding the individual’s motives and beliefs.

This whole ordeal is a gut-wrenching example of terrorism. It is also an example of ignorant journalism and politics. I think it goes without saying that healthy skepticism is necessary. This is especially true in the day and age the media spends more time on farming clicks than actual research, and politicians all but follow the media’s pulse for their policy.