🔗 Share this article

In a notable legal reversal, a national review panel has overturned 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, arguing against an order sought by the online safety regulator.

Details of the Case and Classification Ruling

After the death of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in September, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the classification board to assess and rate the circulating video. The board initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that allowed the regulator to order social media companies to geo-block the videos for an Australian audience.

Elon Musk's company filed an appeal 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 deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

Arguments Presented and Final Ruling

Arguing its case, X contended that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with the weapon not shown. It was argued the footage was grainy and the focus shifted rapidly from the individual to the bystanders.

X maintained the footage was not overly graphic, exploitative, or offensive, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of public importance that generated widespread discussion". The platform drew a parallel between the footage 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 content did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. However, they noted that a longer or clearer version with different editing might have met that threshold. Consequently, the board changed the rating of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Opinion

A minority on the board held a contrary view, arguing 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 comparison to the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as that footage was made public years after the event, "once emotions regarding it had subsided".

Reactions to the Outcome

In a statement on its official policy channel, X welcomed the ruling.

"X fought this case to uphold freedom of expression and the importance of access to information about issues of public interest. We remain dedicated to safeguarding these principles."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the ruling, but noted that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material being displayed to users who are minors".

Recent Developments on Violent Content

In related news, the regulator did not issue take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding disturbing videos 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 instructed to use sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as obscuring the image, on such content in accordance with their own content policies.