🔗 Share this article

In a significant legal reversal, a national review panel has overturned a earlier ruling that prevented viewers in Australia from accessing recorded content of the shooting incident involving conservative commentator Charlie Kirk. This challenge was initiated by Elon Musk's social media platform, which contested an order sought by the national eSafety commissioner.

Background on the Case and Ban

After the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at a US campus in last year, the eSafety commissioner petitioned the review board to officially classify the circulating video. It initially ruled the content was "refused classification", a designation that empowered the regulator to order platforms to geo-block the posts for an Australian audience.

The platform X challenged the decision for a pair of videos depicting the Kirk incident. It also appealed a similar ruling on another piece of footage—depicting the attack on Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina train—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 the weapon not shown. It was argued the footage was grainy and the focus shifted rapidly from the victim to the bystanders.

The social media giant maintained the footage was not excessively detailed, exploitative, or objectionable, adding that it served as a neutral objective record of "a significant incident of public importance that generated extensive public discourse". X drew a parallel between the video 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 content did not reach a level that was exploitative, gratuitous, 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 rating of the content to R18+.

The Minority Viewpoint

Some on the board held a contrary view, arguing the post was "content designed for sharing for the likely purposes of amusement and/or personal gain (such as likes, shares, or views)". They also argued the comparison to the Zapruder JFK film was flawed, as the Kennedy video was released long after the assassination, "once emotions regarding it had calmed".

Reactions to the Decision

Posting on its global government affairs account, the platform expressed approval of the decision.

"X fought this decision to defend freedom of expression and the importance of access to information about matters of public significance. We remain dedicated to protecting these fundamental values."

Representatives for the safety regulator acknowledged the ruling, but noted that the revised classification now means platforms "must take steps to prevent R18+ material is not accessible to users who are minors".

Broader Context on Violent Content

Separately, 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. The regulator stated that while the content were distressing, they had not met the high threshold for a "total ban" rating.

Instead, platforms have been advised to apply sensitive content labels and interstitials, such as blurring, on such content in accordance with their existing community guidelines.