It’s uncertain whether the original video is still available online.

Scott McQuire, media and communications professor at The University of Melbourne points to the relative freedom users have on social media compared to the “interventionist regulation” of broadcast television to explain the discrepancy.

“The internet emerged in the context of neoliberal settings, favouring market solutions and light-touch regulation,” he said.

Many of the mainstream English-language social media platforms originated in the US, he added, where its media regulator – the Federal Communications Commission – is also charged with protecting the first amendment. “Freedom of speech has been a big frame,” he said. “Light-touch regulation has been an important part of the rapid growth of the sector.”

For platforms like TikTok, McQuire said much of the onus is on the user. Without large-scale regulation, it’s generally up to the account holder to decide what breaches privacy.

According to TikTok’s community guidelines, the platform does not allow content that includes personal information that “may create a risk of stalking, violence, phishing, fraud, identity theft, or financial exploitation”.

Loading

Though TikTok declined to comment on the specific case, a spokeswoman said the platform moderated its content under its own privacy guidelines. “We will also take reports from our users and the broader public where they believe their privacy has been infringed,” she said.

A Nine spokesman said while the broadcaster respects the important role ACMA plays, it takes issue with the way the authority interpreted certain parts of the privacy code in this instance.

“This case involved a video which was public and had been seen by around 400,000 people prior to Nine reporting upon it,” the spokesman said.

“Free-to-air television is the most heavily regulated media platform in the country, and we take our obligations under the code very seriously. We do not consider the ACMA’s interpretation to be reflective of the community position in this instance.”

McQuire said the two platforms are unlikely ever to be regulated in identical ways given how global social media is and therefore how unsuited it is to a single national authority.

ACMA’s decision to rule a public broadcaster in breach of privacy will have little meaning if it involves material that is freely available on social media, McQuire said.

However, ACMA Chair Nerida O’Loughlin said certain privacy standards still need to be upheld and precedents maintained among public broadcasters.

“Even if material is already available in the public sphere, as some of this footage was, a licensee has an obligation to consider how broadcasting the material may further impact people’s privacy,” she said.

Following ACMA’s investigation, Nine has agreed to train relevant staff in the privacy requirements of the Code.

Find out the next TV, streaming series and movies to add to your must-sees. Get The Watchlist delivered every Thursday.