Democratic Representative Brad Sherman (CA) recently attracted unwanted public attention after photographs taken by a fellow passenger on a flight from Washington Dulles to Los Angeles were posted on social media. The photos showed Sherman scrolling through images that some deemed explicit on his tablet.
The ‘incriminating’ photos appeared to show the congressman seated in first class on a United Airlines flight, looking at images of women in lingerie and other revealing outfits. The post, which questioned the appropriateness of viewing such content in public, quickly went viral, amassing over 15 million views.
The congressman’s defence and algorithm claim
Representative Sherman acknowledged viewing the images but denied any wrongdoing or illegality. He stated that the pictures had appeared in the platform’s ‘For You’ recommended content section.
“This was on Twitter. These pictures came up on ‘For You’,” he stated. “If you have to fly across the country, you look at a lot of stuff on your tablet.”
A spokesman for the congressman further emphasised this defence, telling Fox News that the incident was “nothing more than scrolling through Twitter”, and that “Elon Musk has unfortunately ruined the Twitter algorithm to provide users with content they neither ask for nor subscribe to.”
Why did California Congressman Brad Sherman feel it was appropriate to look at porn on his iPad during a flight today? His district deserves better representation than this!! #CA32 pic.twitter.com/gAYZ82tyr2
— Dear White Staffers (@dearwhitestaff) November 14, 2025
Sherman also contested the classification of the images themselves. When asked if the images constituted pornography and whether it was appropriate to view them on a plane, he responded, “Is it pornography? I don’t think Elon Musk thinks so. Is it appropriate? No.”
While some users agreed that Musk’s ownership had destabilised the platform’s recommendation system, critics argued that the algorithm simply reflects and amplifies what users engage with. This, in turn, feeds back into the wider question of appropriateness.
Defining the controversy
The incident sparked a two-part debate across the internet.
According to multiple dictionary definitions and legal analysts, the images captured in the viral photos did not constitute pornography under the law. Some observers noted that the images appeared to show less exposure than historical content previously published in tabloids such as the UK’s renowned The Sun’s page 3.
The second point centred on the standards of conduct expected of a public official in a confined public space. Addressing the issue of public appropriateness, a nonplussed Sherman said, “If I see a picture of a woman, might I look at it longer than I would look at a sunset? Yeah.”
It’s almost impossible to scroll X without it coming across your feed. Even when I click “show less content like this” many times over years, it still comes up sometimes.
— Jeff Miller (@JMillerZ4) November 15, 2025
Political and social reactions
The spotlight on Rep. Sherman was quickly seized upon for political commentary. Donald Trump Jr. reacted to the post with a ‘Yikes’, to which Sherman responded with a pointed retort: “Release the Epstein files.”
Other reactions focused on the congressman’s background. Some commentators pointed to his ties to a constituency that includes parts of the adult entertainment industry in the San Fernando Valley, as noted by View from the Wing. Several online comments also referenced his age and religion, highlighting how quickly such incidents can become the subject of broader cultural and political attacks.
Bruh. Release the #EpsteinFiles. https://t.co/fyHHIBWdlG
— Congressman Brad Sherman (@BradSherman) November 15, 2025
Several analysts observed that the fuss seemed disproportionate to the incident itself, describing it as more of a political storm in a teacup than a meaningful scandal.
Regardless of how this incident is classified, it serves as a stark reminder of the limited privacy offered by smartphones, tablets, and other personal devices in public spaces, even in the privacy of a first-class seat. This suggests that any content viewed on a screen in public is vulnerable to scrutiny and potential accusations of lewd behaviour, regardless of its legal status.
