🔗 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 conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an directive issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Background on the Original Ban

After the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the classification board to assess and rate the circulating video. The board first determined the content was "refused classification", a rating that empowered the regulator to order platforms to restrict access to the posts for an Australian audience.

The platform X filed an appeal for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on a separate video—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had likewise been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X asserted that the footage in question contained only brief violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the footage was grainy and the focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the bystanders.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not overly graphic, exploitative, or offensive, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance 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 classification panel 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. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary could have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the panel changed the classification of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the panel held a contrary view, contending the video was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of amusement and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as that footage was released years after the assassination, "once emotions around the matter had calmed".

Response Following the Outcome

Posting on its official policy channel, X expressed approval of the ruling.

"X fought this decision to uphold free speech and the importance of public access about matters of public significance. We remain dedicated to safeguarding these fundamental values."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator also welcomed the board's decision, but noted that the revised classification now implies platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to Australians under 18".

Broader Context on Violent Content

Separately, the eSafety commissioner has not issued take-down orders to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. The regulator stated that while the content were distressing, they had not met the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been advised to use warning labels and screens, such as blurring, on such content in accordance with their existing community guidelines.