🔗 Share this article

In a notable regulatory appeal, a national review panel has overturned a earlier ruling that prevented Australian-based users from accessing recorded content of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an order sought by the online safety regulator.

Details of the Case and Ban

After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the eSafety commissioner applied to the classification board to assess and rate the circulating video. It first determined the content was "refused classification", a rating that empowered the regulator to order social media companies to restrict access to the videos for an Australian audience.

The platform X challenged the decision for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on a separate video—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been classified as "refused classification".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X contended that the footage in question contained only brief violence with no visible weapon. It was argued 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 offensive, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of public importance that prompted widespread discussion". X drew a parallel between the video and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the review board concluded that, "notwithstanding the heinous nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. The board suggested that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary might have met that threshold. Consequently, the board changed the classification of the content to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

Some on the board held a contrary view, arguing the post was "a shareable video for the probable aim of amusement and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the comparison to the Zapruder JFK film was invalid, as the Kennedy video was made public long after the assassination, "once emotions around the matter had calmed".

Reactions to the Outcome

Posting on its official policy channel, X welcomed the ruling.

"We challenged this decision to uphold free speech and the critical nature of access to information about issues of public interest. We remain dedicated to safeguarding these principles."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the ruling, but noted that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to Australians under 18".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

Separately, the eSafety commissioner has not issued formal notices to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the images were distressing, they did not reach the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

As an alternative, the companies have been instructed to apply sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on such content in accordance with their existing community guidelines.