🔗 Share this article

In a significant regulatory appeal, a national review panel has reversed a earlier ruling that prevented Australian-based users from seeing recorded content of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an directive sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Case and Ban

After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator applied to the classification board to officially classify the circulating video. It initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a designation that empowered the commissioner to instruct social media companies to restrict access to the videos for an Australian audience.

The platform X challenged the decision for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on another piece of footage—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been deemed "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X asserted that the footage in question 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.

X argued the video was not overly graphic, exploitative, or objectionable, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that prompted 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 gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary could have met that threshold. As a result, the board revised the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

Some on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the video was "a shareable video for the probable aim of entertainment and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as the Kennedy video was released years after the event, "once emotions around the matter had calmed".

Reactions to the Decision

Posting on its global government affairs account, the platform welcomed the decision.

"We challenged this case to uphold freedom of expression and the importance of public access about issues of public interest. We remain dedicated to safeguarding these fundamental values."

Representatives for the safety regulator acknowledged the ruling, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to users under 18".

Recent Developments 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 images were upsetting, they had not met the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, platforms have been instructed to apply sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on this material in accordance with their own content policies.