🔗 Share this article

In a notable regulatory appeal, a national review panel has reversed a prior decision that blocked Australian-based users from seeing recorded content of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an directive sought by the online safety regulator.

Background on the Case and Classification Ruling

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the classification board to assess and rate the circulating video. It initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a designation that allowed the commissioner to instruct platforms to restrict access to the videos for users in Australia.

The platform X challenged the decision for a pair of videos related to the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a similar ruling on another piece of footage—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had likewise been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X contended that the Kirk video contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. It was argued the footage was grainy and the focus shifted rapidly from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or objectionable, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that prompted widespread discussion". X drew a parallel between the video and the historic film of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the review board 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 longer or clearer version with alternative commentary could have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the board changed the classification of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Viewpoint

A minority on the panel disagreed, arguing the video was "a shareable video for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or benefit (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as that footage was made public years after the event, "after public sentiment around the matter had subsided".

Reactions to the Outcome

In a statement on its global government affairs account, X expressed approval of the ruling.

"We challenged this decision to defend freedom of expression and the importance of access to information about matters of public significance. We remain committed to safeguarding these principles."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator also welcomed the ruling, but noted that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "have obligations to ensure R18+ material being displayed to users under 18".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the eSafety commissioner did not issue take-down orders to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. The regulator stated that while the images were upsetting, they did not reach the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, the companies have been advised to apply sensitive content labels and screens, such as blurring, on this material in line with their existing community guidelines.