🔗 Share this article

Following a notable regulatory appeal, a national review panel has overturned a prior decision that blocked Australian-based users from accessing video footage of the shooting incident involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an order issued at the request of the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Case and Classification Ruling

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the regulator petitioned the classification board to assess and rate the circulating video. It first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that allowed the commissioner to order social media companies to restrict access to the videos for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company challenged the decision for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban 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 Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X contended that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of violence with no visible weapon. The company noted the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the bystanders.

X maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or objectionable, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that generated widespread discussion". X even compared the video and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Most members of the classification panel ultimately agreed that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. However, they noted that a more detailed depiction with alternative commentary might have met that threshold. Consequently, the board changed the classification of the content to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

Some 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)". This view stated the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as the Kennedy video was made public years after the event, "after public sentiment regarding it had subsided".

Response Following the Outcome

Posting on its global government affairs account, the platform expressed approval of the decision.

"We challenged this case to defend free speech and the critical nature of access to information about matters of public significance. We remain committed to protecting these principles."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator acknowledged the board's decision, but pointed out that the revised classification now means platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material being displayed to users under 18".

Broader Context on Violent Content

In related news, the regulator has not issued formal notices to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the images were distressing, they had not met the required standard for a "refused classification" rating.

Instead, platforms have been instructed to use warning labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on such content in line with their own content policies.