🔗 Share this article

In a significant legal reversal, 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 lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an directive sought by the online safety regulator.

Details of the Original Classification Ruling

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the review board to assess and rate the available footage. The board first determined the content was "refused classification", a rating that allowed the regulator to order platforms to geo-block the posts for an Australian audience.

Elon Musk's company challenged the decision for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on a separate video—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X contended that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant argued the video was not overly graphic, exploitative, or objectionable, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of public importance that generated extensive public discourse". X drew a parallel between the footage and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the classification panel concluded that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with different editing might have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the board revised the classification of the videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

A minority on the board disagreed, contending the post was "a shareable video for the probable aim of entertainment and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as the Kennedy video was released years after the assassination, "after public sentiment regarding it had subsided".

Reactions to the Decision

In a statement on its official policy channel, X welcomed the decision.

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

A spokesperson for the safety regulator also welcomed the ruling, but pointed out that the revised classification now means platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material is not accessible to Australians under 18".

Broader Context on Violent Content

Separately, the regulator did not issue formal notices to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the images were upsetting, they had not met the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

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