🔗 Share this article

Following a notable regulatory appeal, a national review panel has reversed a earlier ruling that blocked viewers in Australia from seeing video footage of the shooting incident involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an directive issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Original Classification Ruling

After the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the eSafety commissioner applied to the review board to officially classify the circulating video. It initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a designation that allowed the commissioner to instruct platforms to restrict access to the videos for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on a separate video—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had likewise been classified as "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X contended that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the bystanders.

The social media giant argued the video was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or objectionable, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that generated extensive public discourse". X even compared the video and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Most members of the classification panel concluded that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with alternative commentary could have met that threshold. As a result, the board revised the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the board disagreed, arguing the video was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as that footage was released long after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had subsided".

Response Following the Decision

In a statement on its global government affairs account, the platform welcomed the ruling.

"We challenged this case to defend free speech and the critical nature of public access about issues of public interest. We remain committed to safeguarding these fundamental values."

Representatives for the safety regulator also welcomed the board's decision, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material being displayed to Australians under 18".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

In related news, 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. Officials commented that while the images were distressing, they did not reach the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

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