I kind of agree in the sense that (in my view) preventing Australians from watching the US execution is a kind of a fridge issue - possibly a distraction from more important issues, possible a unnecessarily divisive position for The Greens to take. (Probably most people agree that broadcasting the execution is bad; but many people are sensitive about censorship.)

So in that sense perhaps it is a politically unsavvy thing for The Greens to take a position on. But on the other hand, saying & doing stuff like this is what gets them into the media. When The Greens are only talking about pencil-pushing bean-counting by-the-numbers sensible policies on core issues - they are simply ignored. A few people nod and say 'fair call', and no one says anything. No one spreads the word. And so very very few people hear anything about it. So when The Green stick to their core message, they just don't heard. So these little provocative foraying to side-issue end up being pretty much the only news many people hear about The Greens at all.

Fair enough, I appreciate you adding some nuance to your argument and I can see where you're coming from. I think their argument for a ban is actually way more feasible than Labor openly criticising the US, though. Labor clearly tries very hard to avoid offending this US administration and would never take a such a strong stand on an issue like this.

Whether a ban would actually be effective in terms of stopping every Australian from viewing the execution is another issue, but in terms of actually implementing something that may have some level of effect, a ban is pretty sensible. That's exactly the type of solution Labor would go for.