🔗 Share this article

Following a notable regulatory appeal, a national review panel has reversed a earlier ruling that prevented viewers in Australia from accessing recorded content of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. The appeal was initiated by Elon Musk's company X, which contested an order sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Case and Ban

After the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the regulator petitioned the review board to officially classify the available footage. The board first determined the content was "refused classification", a rating that empowered the regulator to instruct social media companies to geo-block the videos for users in Australia.

The platform X filed an appeal for two separate videos related to the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on another piece of footage—showing the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been deemed "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Final Ruling

In its appeal, X contended that the Kirk video contained only brief violence with no visible weapon. It was argued the recording was low-quality and the camera quickly panned away from the victim to the bystanders.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not overly graphic, exploitative, or offensive, stating it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that prompted extensive public discourse". X drew a parallel between the footage and the well-known recording of President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

The majority of the review board ultimately agreed that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the content did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to justify a complete ban. The board suggested that a more detailed depiction with alternative commentary might have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the board changed the classification of the videos to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

A minority on the panel disagreed, arguing the video was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of amusement and/or benefit (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was invalid, as the Kennedy video was released years after the assassination, "after public sentiment regarding it had calmed".

Response Following the Decision

In a statement on its global government affairs account, X welcomed the ruling.

"X fought this decision to uphold freedom of expression and the critical nature of public access about matters of public significance. Our commitment remains dedicated to safeguarding these fundamental values."

Representatives for the eSafety commissioner acknowledged the ruling, but noted that the new R18+ rating now implies platforms "must take steps to ensure R18+ material being displayed to users under 18".

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the eSafety commissioner has not issued take-down orders to platforms this week regarding graphic footage from the recent Bondi beach terror attack shared across social media. Officials commented that while the images were upsetting, they did not reach the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, the companies have been instructed to apply sensitive content labels and screens, such as blurring, on this material in accordance with their existing community guidelines.