🔗 Share this article

In a notable regulatory appeal, a national review panel has reversed a prior decision that blocked Australian-based users from accessing video footage of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was lodged by Elon Musk's company X, arguing against an order issued at the request of the online safety regulator.

Background on the Original Classification Ruling

After the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in last year, the eSafety commissioner applied to the classification board to assess and rate the circulating video. It initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a rating that allowed the commissioner to instruct platforms to geo-block the videos for users in Australia.

The platform X filed an appeal for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. Additionally, it contested a comparable ban on a separate video—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had likewise been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

In its appeal, X contended that the Kirk video 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 excessively detailed, exploitative, or offensive, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of historical and political significance that generated extensive public discourse". The platform drew a parallel between the video and the historic film of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Most members of the classification panel concluded that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the content 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 might have met that threshold. As a result, the board changed the rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the panel held a contrary view, contending the video was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of amusement and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the parallel with the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as that footage was made public years after the assassination, "once emotions around the matter had calmed".

Response Following the Outcome

Posting on its global government affairs account, the platform welcomed the decision.

"We challenged this decision to uphold free speech and the critical nature of public access about issues of public interest. Our commitment remains dedicated to protecting these principles."

A spokesperson for the safety regulator acknowledged the board's decision, but noted that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to Australians who are minors".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the eSafety commissioner has not issued formal notices 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.

Instead, the companies have been advised to apply warning labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on this material in accordance with their existing community guidelines.