🔗 Share this article

Following a notable regulatory appeal, a national review panel has overturned a earlier ruling that blocked viewers in Australia from seeing video footage of the violent event involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an directive issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Details of the Case and Classification Ruling

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the eSafety commissioner applied to the review board to officially classify the circulating video. The board first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that empowered the regulator to instruct social media companies to restrict access to the posts for an Australian audience.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on a separate video—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been deemed "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X contended that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. The company noted the footage was grainy and the focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the bystanders.

X argued the video was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or offensive, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that generated widespread discussion". X drew a parallel between the footage and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the review board concluded that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. The board suggested that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary could have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the panel changed the classification of the content to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

A minority on the panel held a contrary view, contending the video was "a shareable video for the probable aim of amusement and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as that footage was made public long after the assassination, "once emotions regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Outcome

Posting on its official policy channel, the platform welcomed the ruling.

"X fought this decision to uphold free speech and the importance of public access about issues of public interest. We remain committed to safeguarding these principles."

Representatives for the safety regulator also welcomed the ruling, but noted that the revised classification now means platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to users under 18".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the eSafety commissioner has not issued take-down orders to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the content were distressing, they had not met the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been advised to use warning labels and screens, such as obscuring the image, on this material in accordance with their existing community guidelines.