Sharing dangerous driving videos is ‘truly reprehensible’, PM says
Developed over time first seen 2 months ago
The government has pressed social media companies to remove content glorifying dangerous driving, after two police officers and five other people were killed in a crash near Middlesbrough. Prime Minister Andy Burnham called the sharing of such footage "truly reprehensible", while Defence Minister Luke Pollard said platforms "could take the content down easily and adjust their algorithms" but had a financial incentive not to, since outrageous content attracts more views. TikTok said it had removed the account believed to belong to one of the victims and that, between January and March 2026, it proactively took down 99.8% of content violating its dangerous-driving policies, while Meta said it restricts under-18s from seeing similar material.
PC Tom Clough, 38, and PC Matthew Blades, 37, died on Saturday when a Volkswagen Passat travelling the wrong way down a dual carriageway on the A66, which officers had briefly been pursuing, collided head-on with their marked armed response vehicle. All five occupants of the Passat, including 18-year-old Makai Saddington, were also killed; Cleveland Police said there was no evidence the footage from Friday night and Saturday morning had been filmed for TikTok. Officials noted that under the Online Safety Act, such content is not automatically illegal, leaving platforms to judge whether it breaches their legal obligations rather than simply their own terms of service, with Ofcom having the government's backing to act against firms that fail their duties.
- Crash near Middlesbrough killed two police officers and five others
- PM Burnham brands sharing dangerous driving videos "truly reprehensible"
- TikTok says it proactively removed 99.8% of such content in Q1 2026
New here? Start with this
TikTok and other platforms carry short videos of dangerous driving, sometimes filmed by the drivers themselves, which can spread widely before they are removed. This has become a pressing issue after five people died, including 18-year-old Makai Saddington, when a car being pursued by police crashed head-on into a police vehicle on the A66 near Middlesbrough on Saturday, killing two officers as well as all five occupants of the other car. Footage apparently linked to the crash and to previous dangerous driving by those involved has circulated online, prompting scrutiny of how such content is handled.
The row centres on how much responsibility social media companies bear for content posted by users, and how quickly they act to remove it. Ministers, including Prime Minister Andy Burnham and Defence Minister Luke Pollard, have criticised the sharing of dangerous driving footage and pressed platforms to do more, while TikTok says it already removes the vast majority of material that breaches its rules. The Online Safety Act, a UK law meant to make online platforms more accountable for harmful content, is also part of the debate, since dangerous driving footage is not automatically illegal, leaving platforms to decide whether it breaches their own policies.
This matters because it raises broader questions about how far tech companies should go in policing content that glamorises risky or illegal behaviour, and what powers regulators such as Ofcom have to enforce standards when platforms fall short.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Those who back tougher action argue that platforms bear real responsibility when they host and algorithmically amplify footage glorifying reckless driving, since such content can normalise dangerous behaviour among young viewers and even inspire copycat stunts. Given that TikTok already removes the vast majority of flagged material, ministers argue it is reasonable to expect platforms to go further, tightening algorithms so this content is never recommended in the first place rather than relying on after-the-fact takedowns. They see clear moral urgency in a case where officers died and young people were killed, and argue government and regulators like Ofcom are right to press companies hard and hold them publicly accountable for their duties.
The case against
Others caution that platforms are being asked to police a grey area the law itself has not clearly defined, since the Online Safety Act does not make this content automatically illegal, leaving companies to make difficult, fast judgement calls about what breaches legal duties versus their own terms of service. They argue that TikTok's reported 99.8% removal rate suggests systems are already working reasonably well, and that demanding blanket algorithmic changes risks over-removal of legitimate content such as news coverage, road-safety warnings or dashcam footage used to report bad driving. There is also a genuine concern that placing heavy blame on platforms, rather than addressing the underlying causes of reckless driving among young people, may produce symbolic rather than effective policy.
More coverage
Americas Government Politics Technology Trending Weird & Viral World