🔗 Share this article

In a significant legal reversal, a national review panel has overturned a earlier ruling that blocked Australian-based users from accessing recorded content of the shooting incident involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, arguing against an directive sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Case and Ban

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the regulator applied to the classification board to assess and rate the available footage. It first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that allowed the commissioner to instruct platforms to restrict access to the videos for users in Australia.

The platform X filed an appeal for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on another piece of footage—showing the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had likewise been classified as "refused classification".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X contended that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the recording was low-quality and the focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the surrounding crowd.

X argued the video was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or objectionable, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that generated widespread discussion". X even compared the footage and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

The majority 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 justify a complete ban. The board suggested that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary could have met that threshold. As a result, the board changed the classification of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

Some on the panel held a contrary view, arguing the video was "a shareable video for the probable aim of amusement and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as the Kennedy video was released years after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had subsided".

Reactions to the Decision

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

"We challenged this decision to defend freedom of expression and the importance of public access about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains dedicated to safeguarding these principles."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the board's decision, but noted that the revised classification now implies platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to users who are minors".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the regulator has not issued formal notices 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 had not met the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, platforms have been advised to apply warning labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on such content in accordance with their own content policies.