🔗 Share this article

In a notable legal reversal, a national review panel has reversed a prior decision that blocked viewers in Australia from accessing video footage of the violent event involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an order issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Background on the Original Classification Ruling

After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the eSafety commissioner applied to the classification board to assess and rate the available footage. The board first determined 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 challenged the decision for a pair of 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 deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X contended that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

X maintained the footage was not overly graphic, gratuitous, or objectionable, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of public importance that prompted widespread discussion". The platform even compared the footage and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

Most members 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 different editing could have met that threshold. As a result, the panel revised the classification of the content to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the board held a contrary view, contending the post was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as the Kennedy video was released long after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had subsided".

Reactions to the Decision

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

"We challenged this decision to defend free speech and the importance of access to information about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains dedicated to safeguarding these fundamental values."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the ruling, but noted that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to Australians under 18".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the eSafety commissioner did not issue take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. Officials commented that while the content were upsetting, they had not met the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, the companies have been instructed to apply warning labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on such content in accordance with their own content policies.