🔗 Share this article

In a significant regulatory appeal, a national review panel has overturned a prior decision that prevented Australian-based users from seeing video footage of the shooting incident involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an directive issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Case and Ban

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the classification board to officially classify the circulating video. It initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a rating that empowered the regulator to instruct social media companies to geo-block the posts for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on a separate video—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been classified as "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X contended that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with no visible weapon. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the bystanders.

The social media giant argued the video was not overly graphic, exploitative, or objectionable, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of public importance that prompted extensive public discourse". The platform even compared the footage and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the review board ultimately agreed that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary might have met that threshold. As a result, the board revised the rating of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

Some on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the post was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of entertainment and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". This view stated the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as the Kennedy video was released years after the assassination, "once emotions around the matter had calmed".

Reactions to the Decision

Posting on its official policy channel, the platform expressed approval of the decision.

"X fought this decision to uphold free speech and the critical nature of access to information about matters of public significance. We remain dedicated to safeguarding these principles."

Representatives for the safety regulator also welcomed the ruling, but noted that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material being displayed to Australians who are minors".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

In related news, the eSafety commissioner has not issued take-down orders to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the images were distressing, they did not reach the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been instructed to use warning labels and screens, such as obscuring the image, on such content in line with their own content policies.