In the digital age, social media has become the battleground for political statements and public outcry, with every post potentially sparking a national conversation or controversy.

This was certainly the case for a prominent Australian politician, whose social media page became the centre of a heated debate following the sharing of a contentious image involving King Charles III.

As discussions about personal rights and public personas continue to unfold, this incident serves as a reminder of the complexities involved in navigating fame and public image in the digital age.

Independent Senator Thorpe, known for her outspoken advocacy on Indigenous rights, found herself at the heart of a social media storm when a cartoon depicting a decapitated King Charles III was posted on her social media page’s story.

The graphic image, which was accompanied by the text ‘You are not our king,’ echoed the sentiments Thorpe vocalised during a protest in Parliament House in Canberra.

Independent Senator Lidia Thorpe deleted a controversial image from her social media, which she alleged had been shared without her approval. Credit: Facebook / Senator Lidia Thorpe

‘Earlier tonight, without my knowledge, one of my staff shared an image to my Instagram stories created by another account,’ Thorpe explained on her social media page.

‘I deleted it as soon as I saw.’

‘I would not intentionally share anything that could be seen to encourage violence against anyone,’ she added.

The senator's demonstration was as bold as it was polarising, with her cries of ‘give us our land back’, ‘not your land’, and ‘you are not my king. You are not our king,’ reverberating through the Great Hall.

She also urged the king to ‘give us a treaty’ and was heard saying, ‘f*** the colony’ before security ultimately removed her.

The protest itself was a significant moment, capturing the attention of all present and quickly becoming a topic of national conversation.

Thorpe's actions were met with a spectrum of reactions, from those who lauded her as ‘legendary’ for her audacity to stand up for Indigenous sovereignty to others who condemned the disruption as disrespectful.

Among the critics was former Indigenous senator and Olympian Nova Peris, who said she was ‘deeply disappointed’ at what she considered an embarrassing and disrespectful display during what should have been a respectful event.

‘Her outburst, which disrupted what should have been a respectful event, was both embarrassing and disrespectful to our nation and the Royal Family,’ Peris wrote on social media.

As tensions flared during the protest, the royal visit continued to captivate the attention of the public, with King Charles and Queen Camilla charming Australian crowds.

While Senator Lidia Thorpe’s outburst highlighted the ongoing discussions around Indigenous rights and representation, the royal couple’s warm reception underscored their commitment to fostering positive relations with the community.

This juxtaposition of protest and celebration illustrates the complex dynamics at play during their visit, reminding us of the diverse perspectives that shape our nation’s narrative.

Key Takeaways

• Independent Senator Lidia Thorpe deleted a contentious image that was shared on her social media page without her approval, reportedly showing a cartoon of King Charles III's decapitated head.
• The senator had protested during King Charles' speech in Parliament House in Canberra, making headlines with her actions and vocal opposition.
• The image shared on Thorpe's social media page included the phrase ‘You are not our king’, echoing her comments made during the protest in the Great Hall.
• While Thorpe has received both praise and criticism for her demonstration, she stated she does not endorse violence and that the post did not reflect her values.

We invite our readers to share their thoughts on this matter. How do you feel about the use of social media by public figures to make political statements? Do you believe Senator Thorpe's protest was effective in raising awareness, or do you think it crossed a line? Join the discussion in the comments below and let us know your perspective on the intersection of politics, protest, and social media etiquette.

 

[Raya]

Disgraceful behaviour from a public servant. Time for her to be removed!

 

[Hollingworthlake]

She’s made a mess of her oath when she pledged allegiance to the Queen quoting she meant hairs and didn’t know the correct meaning of heirs. What a load of rubbish. As Peter Dutton said she’s been willing to accept $500 a year even though she is not willing to accept King Charles as her King. What a load of bollocks. I think she is often very aggressive and not a good look for our coloured brothers and sisters.

 

[Hollingworthlake]

I know of a young boy who was so called’stolen’ also, he was taken from a family that abused him from birth, he was put with a beautiful family who loved and cherished him, he had a wonderful life, went to school then to uni and became a lawyer, all this carry on about the stolen generation is not right, most children were taken from abusive parents, it is another beat up by indigenous elites to cause trouble for Australia. Just look at Alice Springs, NT and the youth crime and tell me it is still warranted taking children out of harms way for a better life.

I liked the way a child said she wasn’t stolen but saved. After working in their world and assessing their opportunities I have to agree with that comment

 

[Milica]

I admire Lidia Thorpe for standing up f[r what she believes in, and for her people. Could she have done so in another way? In the midst of the extravagant adulation accorded the King and Queen of England, it's difficult to see how.

What strikes me as particularly unfortunate is that the media is spending time and energy discussing Senator Thorpe's actions but, as ever, ignoring her *message*. Perhaps if the media were more attentive to Indigenous matters Lidia Thorpe might not have needed to act as she did.

As to using social media, I think it's legitimate, but with caveats. Make the post considered and intelligible. Don't proceed with raw passion, and resist impulse: sleep on the contentious and controversial. If it survives the "Sleep Test," post and be damned!

She seems to think she can verbally abuse anyone she so chooses - why is she still in parliament?

 

[Milica]

So wish she could make her message known in parliament rather than this way that has engendered such dislike for both her and the message she is trying to put forward.

I am not sure what message she is trying to put forward?

 

[Thecla]

Just had a thought (yes, it hurt!) Parliamentarians swore allegiance to Queen Elizabeth II "and her heirs*."

Surely this is incorrect. Charles was the Queen's heir before succeeding her as King. Was it intended that Parliamentarians should swear allegiance to Elizabeth, and Charles, William and George - all of whom are or were at the time her heirs?

Should the oath of allegiance not have been to "Queen Elizabeth and her *successors* (as sovereign)"?

* Except Senator Thorpe, who swore allegiance to Queen Elizabeth and her hairs.

and that stupid possum coast that she killed 0ver 100 possums for!

 

[SGH]

If she resigns from parliament she will also get a gigantic pension which she doesn't deserve!

No she won't that doesn't happen anymore. A politician has to serve two terms, she will not get another term. When Andrew Chee walked away with the golden pension years ago the put a stop to anyone walking doing 6 to 8 years and becoming a bottom feeder off the taxpayer. If a member's retirement is involuntary (e.g. due to the loss of pre-selection or loss at an election), a retiring parliamentarian qualifies for a pension after eight years of service, or after serving three terms. The minimum pension rate is 50% of the parliamentary allowance (after eight years of service)
Goggle Ted Mack, He served two terms and left, again just before he would have been entitled to a generous parliamentary pension. He represented North Sydney, he would have been the only politician that I ever had any respect for.

 

[Kayer02]

I admire Lidia Thorpe for standing up f[r what she believes in, and for her people. Could she have done so in another way? In the midst of the extravagant adulation accorded the King and Queen of England, it's difficult to see how.

What strikes me as particularly unfortunate is that the media is spending time and energy discussing Senator Thorpe's actions but, as ever, ignoring her *message*. Perhaps if the media were more attentive to Indigenous matters Lidia Thorpe might not have needed to act as she did.

As to using social media, I think it's legitimate, but with caveats. Make the post considered and intelligible. Don't proceed with raw passion, and resist impulse: sleep on the contentious and controversial. If it survives the "Sleep Test," post and be damned!

Admire ?? Sorry but I have to disagree.. I am utterly disgusted by her...If you look back this young lady has always carried on like a twit and I find there is nothing to admire about her behaviour or herself. Her family, has said that she had a priviledged upbringing and are bewildered by her behaviour. However you, like myself are entitled to our own opinions..