🔗 Share this article

In a significant legal reversal, a national review panel has overturned a prior decision that blocked Australian-based users from seeing recorded content of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an order sought by the online safety regulator.

Details of the Original Ban

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the classification board to officially classify the available footage. The board initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that allowed the commissioner to order social media companies to geo-block the videos for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company challenged the decision for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on another piece of footage—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had likewise been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X asserted that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the bystanders.

X maintained the footage was not overly graphic, exploitative, or objectionable, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of public importance that prompted widespread discussion". X even compared the video and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

The majority 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 justify a complete ban. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with different editing might have resulted in a different ruling. Consequently, the board revised the classification of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

Some on the panel disagreed, arguing the post was "a shareable video for the probable aim of amusement and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as the Kennedy video was released years after the assassination, "once emotions regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Outcome

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

"X fought this case to uphold freedom of expression and the importance of public access about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains committed to protecting these principles."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the ruling, but pointed out that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material being displayed to Australians under 18".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

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 did not reach the high threshold for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, the companies have been instructed to use sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on this material in line with their existing community guidelines.