Dangerous driving videos linked to Ireland reached enormous audiences before social media platforms acted. The Irish Examiner reported new figures involving 130 items of content originating in Ireland. Those items received about 1.5 million worldwide views on Meta services before enforcement. Meta removed 127 items and restricted the remaining three to adults.
TikTok also confirmed that its most viewed Irish dangerous driving clip gained 150,000 views before removal. These figures expose a serious gap between identifying harmful content and preventing its spread. A platform may eventually remove a video, yet the harm may already have travelled through recommendations, searches, shares and private messages. The central question is no longer whether platforms have written rules. They do. The question is whether their detection and enforcement systems act quickly enough to prevent predictable real world harm.
What the platforms told the Oireachtas committee
The Oireachtas Committee on Arts, Media, Communications, Culture and Sport examined online content promoting criminal activity on 23 September 2026. The official committee announcement named Coimisiún na Meán, TikTok, Meta and Google among the participants.
Committee members asked the companies to provide clearer figures after the hearing. The later disclosures showed how much reach some content achieved before enforcement.
TikTok said 83.4 per cent of illegal or dangerous videos were removed before anyone viewed them. That figure rose to 86.5 per cent when videos receiving fewer than ten views were included. However, the company did not provide the total reach of all remaining videos. It only confirmed that the most viewed clip received 150,000 views.
TikTok said that clip did not show a vehicle driving against traffic. It showed a car travelling at speed, mixed with footage of the parked vehicle. The company removed it as a precaution because the location and speed were unclear.
Meta reported enforcement against 130 items of Ireland originated viral challenge content. It removed 127 and restricted three to adults. Together, those items gained about 1.5 million worldwide views before enforcement.
The company had recently classified driving against oncoming traffic as a prohibited high risk viral challenge. The RTÉ report on the committee hearing states that Meta made this change following the fatal M9 collision in August.
TikTok also reported 13 proactive escalations to An Garda Síochána during 2025 and ten during 2026. Meta could not provide the requested information about Garda referrals by the committee deadline. Google sought more time to compile its figures. These figures should not be treated as a direct comparison between platforms. The companies used different categories, periods and measurements. That lack of consistent reporting is itself an important problem.
Removal rates do not reveal the full level of harm
A high removal percentage can create the impression that a system works almost perfectly. However, percentages alone do not show how widely the missed content travelled. One video with 150,000 views may create more risk than thousands removed before anyone sees them. For dangerous driving videos, the reach of each enforcement failure may matter more than the overall removal percentage.
The same issue applies to the Meta figures. Removing 127 items sounds decisive. Yet those items collectively reached about 1.5 million views before enforcement. A view does not necessarily represent one person, but the number still demonstrates substantial distribution.
Platforms should publish measurements that reveal both speed and exposure. Useful information would include:
- The time between upload, detection and enforcement.
- The number of unique accounts that saw the material.
- The proportion of viewers who were children.
- The number of views generated through recommendation systems.
- The number of copies, edited versions and repeated uploads detected.
- The action taken against repeat offenders and connected accounts.
- The threshold used when deciding whether to contact An Garda Síochána.
Without these figures, the public cannot judge whether moderation prevented harm or merely reacted after mass exposure.
Why dangerous driving videos can influence behaviour
Dangerous driving existed long before social media. Therefore, it would be inaccurate to claim that platforms created the behaviour. Social media can, however, change its audience, rewards and scale.
The person behind the wheel may no longer perform only for passengers or nearby peers. A phone creates an imagined audience that could include thousands of viewers. Likes, comments, follower growth and reposts can turn illegal risk taking into a public performance.
This is where social validation becomes important. Social validation is the approval people receive from others through visible reactions. For some users, particularly young people seeking status or belonging, that approval may make increasingly extreme behaviour feel rewarding.
The Research
A peer reviewed study titled The Power of the Like in Adolescence found that teenagers were more likely to approve images that already had many likes. Images with strong peer approval also produced greater activity in brain regions linked to reward and social processing. The study does not prove that likes caused any Irish driving incident. It does show how visible approval can influence adolescent attention and behaviour.
Repeated exposure can also create normalisation. Behaviour that initially looks shocking may begin to appear common, admired or socially accepted. Comments that praise speed, courage or defiance can further strengthen that impression.
Research on dangerous online challenges remains developing. A 2025 scoping review of risky social media challenges examined 54 relevant articles. Injuries appeared in 89 per cent of them. However, the authors also found limited evidence about which interventions work. That uncertainty supports careful research, but it does not justify waiting for more deaths before improving prevention.
Cyberpsychology can help explain these pressures. It does not remove personal responsibility for dangerous or criminal conduct. Instead, it shows why platforms must consider how public metrics, peer reactions and recommendation systems may amplify existing risk.
Platform rules already prohibit dangerous conduct
TikTok states that it does not allow content showing or promoting dangerous activity that could cause significant physical harm. Its current Community Guidelines specifically identify speeding, running red lights and distracted driving as prohibited examples. These rules should enable rapid action against dangerous driving videos without waiting for a new national classification.
Some imitable activity that may cause physical harm can be restricted to adults rather than removed. That distinction deserves scrutiny when the content involves illegal driving. An adults only label does not remove the risk that dangerous footage will attract praise, imitation or further distribution.
Meta has stated that it now treats driving against oncoming traffic as a prohibited high risk viral challenge. This change is welcome. However, it also raises a difficult question. Why did the clearest and most dangerous form of wrong way driving require a new classification after a fatal collision?
Safety systems should anticipate reasonably foreseeable behaviour. They should not depend on a national tragedy before a platform creates the correct enforcement category.
Irish and European safety obligations
Ireland already has a binding framework for harmful video content. The Coimisiún na Meán Online Safety Code requires regulated video sharing services to protect children from content that may impair their physical, mental or moral development. It also covers dangerous challenges that threaten health or safety. Dangerous driving videos may fall within this framework when they encourage conduct that threatens a child’s health or safety.
The Code expects services to apply their own terms, offer effective reporting tools and use appropriate child protection measures. Therefore, enforcement quality matters just as much as the wording of a platform policy.
The European Union Digital Services Act adds wider duties for the largest platforms. The European Commission guidance on very large online platforms explains that these services must assess and reduce systemic risks. Relevant risks include public security, public health, children’s rights and physical wellbeing. Possible measures include changes to service design and recommendation systems.
Regulators do not need to prove that every harmful video caused a specific act before examining platform systems. They can assess whether a service identified foreseeable risks and introduced proportionate safeguards.
Seven questions the platforms must now answer
Ireland needs consistent answers from TikTok, Meta, Google and every platform that hosts or recommends dangerous driving content.
- How long did the highest reach videos remain available?
- How many views came from recommendations rather than deliberate searches?
- How many children encountered the material before enforcement?
- Did the platforms identify and block copies after removing the original videos?
- Were repeat uploaders suspended, and were connected accounts investigated?
- What evidence triggers an urgent referral to An Garda Síochána?
- Will every platform remove comparable content under a consistent standard?
This cannot become a debate about TikTok alone. Instagram, Facebook, Threads, YouTube, Snapchat and other services can host or circulate similar material. Rules and enforcement should follow the risk, not the platform name.
What parents and schools can do
Parents cannot solve a platform design and enforcement problem on their own. However, calm conversations can help young people recognise how online attention may distort risk.
Ask children whether they have seen videos showing speeding, vehicle theft, Garda pursuits or driving against traffic. Avoid beginning with blame or punishment. A young person who expects anger may hide what they have seen or received. Parents can also ask what comments appeared beneath dangerous driving videos and whether friends shared them privately.
Explain that viewing, liking, commenting on or forwarding a clip can increase its visibility. Encourage children to report dangerous material through the platform and then leave it alone. They should never repost footage to condemn it because reposting can still extend its reach.
If a video appears to show an immediate threat to life, contact An Garda Síochána. Call 112 or 999 in an emergency. Preserve the link, account name and relevant details without publicly identifying any child or sharing the footage further.
Schools should include this issue within digital citizenship and road safety education. Lessons should examine social validation, peer pressure and the commercial value of attention. Schools should not replay graphic or sensational clips to create impact.
Families seeking broader support can use CODA’s Resources for Parents, TikTok Safety Settings and YouTube Safety Settings.
The CODA View
The most important figure is not the percentage of videos eventually removed. It is the number of people reached before the system acted.
The latest disclosures show a clear enforcement gap. Harmful content can gain major exposure even when platforms later classify their moderation as successful. Consequently, transparency must measure speed, reach, recommendations, repeat uploads and child exposure.
Dangerous driving videos combine real world risk with online reward. Public approval can turn reckless conduct into performance, while recommendation systems can expand the audience.
Regulators must examine that interaction rather than assessing each clip as an isolated upload. The response to dangerous driving videos must therefore combine fast enforcement, transparent data, education and effective regulation.
Platforms deserve credit when they detect material before anyone sees it. However, strong performance on easy detections cannot cancel out a smaller number of serious failures with vast reach. Prevention must begin before the next tragedy, not after it.
About Children of the Digital Age
Children of the Digital Age provides independent online safety education for parents, schools, professionals and organisations. Our work combines law enforcement experience, cyberpsychology, digital safety and practical prevention.
For training, guidance or support, visit Children of the Digital Age or contact CODA.
Last updated: 25 September 2026.
References
- Irish Examiner, Dangerous driving clip on TikTok gained 150,000 views before removal. Reports the follow up figures supplied by TikTok and Meta on 25 September 2026.
- Houses of the Oireachtas, committee hearing announcement. Identifies the hearing topic and participating organisations.
- RTÉ News, TikTok cites 1,600 risky driving videos since M9 crash. Provides reporting from the committee hearing and the platform responses.
- Sherman and colleagues, The Power of the Like in Adolescence. Peer reviewed research on social approval and adolescent responses to online images.
- Middelberg and colleagues, Risky social media challenges: a scoping review, 2000 to 2024. Reviews published evidence on injuries, platforms and proposed interventions.
- TikTok Community Guidelines, Dangerous Activity and Challenges. Sets out TikTok’s current rules for dangerous activities and driving content.
- Coimisiún na Meán, Online Safety Code. Explains the Irish requirements applying to harmful video content and child protection.
- European Commission, DSA rules for very large online platforms. Explains systemic risk assessment and mitigation duties under the Digital Services Act.