🔗 Share this article

Following a significant legal reversal, a national review panel has overturned a earlier ruling that prevented viewers in Australia from seeing video footage of the shooting incident involving influencer Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an directive sought by the online safety regulator.

Details of the Original Ban

Following the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the regulator petitioned the review board to assess and rate the circulating video. It first determined the content was "unable to be classified", a designation that allowed the regulator to order platforms to restrict access to the videos for users in Australia.

The platform X filed an appeal for two separate videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a comparable ban on a separate video—depicting the assault of Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—which had also been classified as "unacceptable for distribution".

The Platform's Case and Board's Decision

Arguing its case, 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 individual to the bystanders.

X maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or objectionable, stating it served as a factual documentation of "a significant incident of historical and political significance that prompted extensive public discourse". The platform drew a parallel between the footage and the well-known recording of the JFK shooting.

Most members of the review board ultimately agreed 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 might have resulted in a different ruling. As a result, the panel changed the classification of the videos to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

Some on the panel held a contrary view, contending the post was "content designed for sharing for the probable aim of entertainment and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". This view stated the comparison to the JFK assassination tape was flawed, as the Kennedy video was made public years after the event, "once emotions around the matter had subsided".

Response Following the Decision

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

"X fought this case to uphold free speech and the importance of access to information about matters of public significance. We remain committed to protecting these principles."

A spokesperson for the eSafety commissioner also welcomed the board's decision, but noted that the new R18+ rating now means platforms "have obligations to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to Australians who are minors".

Recent Developments on Sensitive Footage

In related news, the regulator did not issue take-down orders to platforms this week regarding disturbing videos from the recent Bondi beach terror attack circulating on social media. Officials commented that while the content were distressing, they had not met the required standard for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, the companies have been advised to apply warning labels and screens, such as blurring, on such content in line with their existing community guidelines.