Following the shooting of conservative activist Charlie Kirk on Wednesday, graphic videos of his death began making the rounds. Almost all professional news organizations declined to publicize these videos. But it was a different story on the internet, where footage of Kirk gushing blood after being shot in the neck became easily accessible on social media. This led to questions across the political spectrum about why such videos circulated so quickly and whether social media platforms have an obligation to censor them.

News organizations’ roles have changed

Traditional media outlets were “careful with the explicit imagery — as usual,” said The Associated Press . But in “practical terms, though, it mattered little.” Videos of the shooting from multiple angles were widely disseminated o

See Full Page