Brian Lairn on WNYC.

So the assassination of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University last year was obviously

incredibly disturbing and horrible in its own right,

but also very disturbing was how quickly graphic footage of his final moment spread across

social media platforms. Just moments after Kirk was fatally shot in front of a live audience of

thousands, multiple videos

from various angles of the event, as many of you know, went viral on nearly every social media

platform. If you happen to be casually scrolling through X on Wednesday afternoon, you

are likely served the gory video unprompted amongst the mundane content that you typically

consume. That's just one example. We're not even singling out X here. This resulted in what some

are describing as a mass traumatic event that's raised urgent questions about content moderation

and our relationship with violence online.

While questions still remain about the shooter's motives and the long-term consequences

this act of political violence will have on the nation, like we were discussing in our previous

segment, we will look now at the ubiquity of violence on social media and specifically

how many children, among others, wound up seeing this

awful murder without the platforms doing anything preventative that arguably they could have done

without stifling free speech. We'll do this with Adam Clark S.D.'s Senior Technology correspondent

at Fox. Adam, thanks for joining us for this. Welcome to WNYC.

Thank you so much. How quickly did what go online and who saw it?

The videos went online immediately. I mean, the assassination happened in front of a crowd of people

who were already carrying smartphones,

...