🔗 Share this article

Following a notable regulatory appeal, a national review panel has reversed a earlier ruling that blocked viewers in Australia from seeing recorded content of the shooting incident involving influencer Charlie Kirk. The appeal was lodged by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an directive sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Details of the Original Ban

Following the death of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University in September, the eSafety commissioner applied to the review board to assess and rate the circulating video. The board initially ruled the content was "unable to be classified", a rating that allowed the regulator to order platforms to geo-block the videos for users in Australia.

Elon Musk's company challenged the decision for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on a separate video—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a train in Charlotte—which had also been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, X asserted that the footage in question contained only a short moment of violence with the weapon not shown. The company noted the footage was grainy and the camera quickly panned away from the individual to the surrounding crowd.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, gratuitous, or objectionable, adding that it served as a factual documentation of "a notorious public event of public importance that prompted widespread discussion". X even compared the video and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

The majority of the classification panel concluded that, "despite the terrible nature of the event," the video did not reach a level that was gratuitous, exploitative or offensive enough to warrant a 'refused classification' rating. The board suggested that a longer or clearer version with alternative commentary could have met that threshold. As a result, the board revised the rating of the content to R18+.

A Dissenting Opinion

Some on the panel held a contrary view, contending the post was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as engagement metrics)". They also argued the parallel with the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as the Kennedy video was made public long after the event, "once emotions regarding it had subsided".

Reactions to the Outcome

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

"We challenged this decision to uphold free speech and the importance of public access about matters of public significance. We remain dedicated to protecting these fundamental values."

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

Broader Context on Sensitive Footage

Separately, the regulator has not issued take-down orders to social media companies this week regarding graphic footage from the Sydney beach incident circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the content were upsetting, they had not met the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, platforms have been instructed to use warning labels and screens, such as blurring, on this material in accordance with their existing community guidelines.