🔗 Share this article

In a significant legal reversal, a national review panel has reversed a earlier ruling that blocked viewers in Australia from accessing video footage of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an order sought by the online safety regulator.

Details of the Original Ban

After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator applied to the review board to assess and rate the circulating video. The board initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a designation that allowed the regulator to order platforms to restrict access to the posts for users in Australia.

The platform X challenged the decision for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on another piece of footage—showing the assault of 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 Kirk video contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the recording was low-quality and the focus shifted rapidly from the individual to the bystanders.

The social media giant argued the video was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or offensive, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that prompted extensive public discourse". The platform even compared the video and the historic film of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the classification panel 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. As a result, the board revised the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the board held a contrary view, contending the post was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of amusement and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as the Kennedy video was made public years after the event, "once emotions regarding it had subsided".

Response Following the Decision

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

"We challenged this decision to defend freedom of expression and the critical nature of public access about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains committed to safeguarding these principles."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the board's decision, but pointed out that the revised classification now implies platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to Australians under 18".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the eSafety commissioner did not issue formal notices to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident shared across social media. Officials commented that while the images were distressing, they did not reach the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

As an alternative, the companies have been advised to use sensitive content labels and screens, such as obscuring the image, on such content in accordance with their existing community guidelines.